Aristotle and Liberty
On February 6 Michael Pakaluk, professor of ethics and social philosophy at the Catholic University of America gave a lecture called “Is Aristotle a Friend of Liberty?” He is a self-proclaimed "disciple" of Aristotle. Pakaluk argued that Aristotle is a friend of liberty based on what various founders said about him.
Pakaluk cited Jefferson and Adams, who looked to Aristotle for the principles and institutions of the new government. He argued that because those principles and institutions safeguard liberty, anyone who stands by them is a friend to liberty. These safeguards include governance for the good of the people, checks and balances, separation of powers, mixed regime, and rule of law.
As a lover of philosophy, I thoroughly appreciate Aristotle. However, I am not sure that his principles promote liberty for everyone. For example, Aristotle preferred aristocracy to democracy. He thought it best that a few people known for their virtue and merit make most political decisions under the governance of law. I am not convinced that power in the hands of a few would promote liberty for many.
In addition, Pakaluk argues that strengthening the family and the middle class promotes liberty, using Aristotle's value of those things as evidence. It seems as if strengthening the middle class might increase liberty for the middle class, but what of lower classes? Pakaluk doesn't mention them.
Overall, it seems as though Aristotle is a friend of middle class families. In this way, he may be a friend of the liberty of middle class families, but to say he is a friend of liberty is too strong of a claim. I appreciate Pakaluk's charitable reading of Aristotle, but he fails to address major objections to his argument.
Pakaluk cited Jefferson and Adams, who looked to Aristotle for the principles and institutions of the new government. He argued that because those principles and institutions safeguard liberty, anyone who stands by them is a friend to liberty. These safeguards include governance for the good of the people, checks and balances, separation of powers, mixed regime, and rule of law.
As a lover of philosophy, I thoroughly appreciate Aristotle. However, I am not sure that his principles promote liberty for everyone. For example, Aristotle preferred aristocracy to democracy. He thought it best that a few people known for their virtue and merit make most political decisions under the governance of law. I am not convinced that power in the hands of a few would promote liberty for many.
In addition, Pakaluk argues that strengthening the family and the middle class promotes liberty, using Aristotle's value of those things as evidence. It seems as if strengthening the middle class might increase liberty for the middle class, but what of lower classes? Pakaluk doesn't mention them.
Overall, it seems as though Aristotle is a friend of middle class families. In this way, he may be a friend of the liberty of middle class families, but to say he is a friend of liberty is too strong of a claim. I appreciate Pakaluk's charitable reading of Aristotle, but he fails to address major objections to his argument.
Comments
Post a Comment