Aristotle criticized Plato's doctrine of a perfect state, and preferred to talk about a political system that most states could have. He believed that the community of property, wives and children proposed by Plato would lead to the destruction of the state. Aristotle was a staunch defender of individual rights, private property and the monogamous family, as well as a supporter of slavery.
Having carried out a grandiose generalization of the social and political experience of the Hellenes, Aristotle developed an original socio-political teaching. When studying socio-political life, he proceeded from the principle: “As elsewhere, the best way of theoretical construction is to consider the primary formation of objects.” He considered such “education” to be the natural desire of people for living together and for political communication.
According to Aristotle, man is a political being, that is, a social one, and he carries within himself an instinctive desire for “cohabitation together.”
The first result social life Aristotle considered the formation of a family - husband and wife, parents and children... The need for mutual exchange led to the communication of families and villages. This is how the state arose. The state is created not in order to live in general, but to live mainly happily.
According to Aristotle, the state arises only when communication is created for the sake of a good life between families and clans, for the sake of a perfect and sufficient life for itself.
The nature of the state is “ahead” of the family and the individual. Thus, the perfection of a citizen is determined by the qualities of the society to which he belongs - whoever wants to create perfect people must create perfect citizens, and whoever wants to create perfect citizens must create a perfect state.
Having identified society with the state, Aristotle was forced to search for the goals, interests and nature of people’s activities depending on their property status and used this criterion when characterizing various strata of society. He identified three main layers of citizens: the very wealthy, the average, and the extremely poor. According to Aristotle, the poor and the rich “turn out to be elements in the state that are diametrically opposed to each other, that depending on the preponderance of one or another of the elements, the corresponding form is established political system" As a supporter of the slave system, Aristotle closely connected slavery with the issue of property: an order is rooted in the very essence of things, by virtue of which, from the moment of birth, some beings are destined for subordination, while others are destined for dominion. This is a general law of nature and animate beings are also subject to it. According to Aristotle, whoever by nature belongs not to himself, but to another, and at the same time is still a person, is by nature a slave.
The best state is that society which is achieved through the medium of the middle element (that is, the "middle" element between slave owners and slaves), and those states have best system, where the middle element is represented in greater numbers, where it has a greater value compared to both extreme elements. Aristotle noted that when a state has many people deprived of political rights, when there are many poor people in it, then there will inevitably be hostile elements in such a state.
The basic general rule, according to Aristotle, should be the following: no citizen should be given the opportunity to excessively increase his political power beyond its proper measure.
Aristotle, relying on the results of Plato's political philosophy, singled out the special scientific study of a certain area of social relations into an independent science of politics.
According to Aristotle, people can only live in society, under the conditions of a political system, since “man is by nature a political being.” In order to properly organize social life, people need politics.
Politics is a science, knowledge of how to best organize the common life of people in a state.
Politics is the art and skill of public administration.
The essence of politics is revealed through its goal, which, according to Aristotle, is to give citizens high moral qualities, to make them people who act fairly. That is, the goal of politics is a fair (common) good. Achieving this goal is not easy. A politician must take into account that people have not only virtues, but also vices. Therefore, the task of politics is not to educate morally perfect people, but to cultivate virtues in citizens. The virtue of a citizen consists of the ability to fulfill one's civic duty and the ability to obey authorities and laws. Therefore, the politician must look for the best, that is, the one that most meets the specified goal, government system.
The state is a product of natural development, but at the same time the highest form of communication. Man by nature is a political being, and in the state (political communication) the process of this political nature of man is completed.
Depending on the goals that the rulers of the state set for themselves, Aristotle distinguished between correct and incorrect government systems:
The correct system is a system in which the common good is pursued, regardless of whether one, a few or many rule:
Monarchy (Greek monarchia - autocracy) is a form of government in which all supreme power belongs to the monarch.
Aristocracy (Greek aristokratia - power of the best) is a form of government in which supreme power belongs by inheritance to the clan nobility, privileged class. The power of the few, but more than one.
Polity - Aristotle considered this form to be the best. It occurs extremely “rarely and in a few.” In particular, discussing the possibility of establishing a polity in contemporary Greece, Aristotle came to the conclusion that such a possibility was small. In a polity, the majority rules in the interests of the common good. Polity is the “average” form of the state, and the “average” element here dominates in everything: in morals - moderation, in property - average wealth, in power - the middle stratum. “A state consisting of average people will have the best political system.”
An incorrect system is a system in which the private goals of the rulers are pursued:
Tyranny is a monarchical power that has in mind the benefits of one ruler.
Oligarchy - respects the benefits of wealthy citizens. A system in which power is in the hands of people who are rich and of noble birth and form a minority.
Democracy is the benefit of the poor; among the incorrect forms of the state, Aristotle gave preference to it, considering it the most tolerable. Democracy should be considered a system when the freeborn and the poor, constituting the majority, have supreme power in their hands. Deviation from monarchy gives tyranny,
deviation from aristocracy - oligarchy,
deviation from politics - democracy.
deviation from democracy - ochlocracy.
The basis of all social upheavals is property inequality. According to Aristotle, oligarchy and democracy base their claim to power in the state on the fact that property is the lot of a few, and all citizens enjoy freedom. The oligarchy protects the interests of the propertied classes. None of them have any general benefit.
In any political system, the general rule should be the following: no citizen should be given the opportunity to excessively increase his political power beyond due measure. Aristotle advised to monitor ruling officials so that they do not turn public office into a source of personal enrichment.
Deviation from law means a departure from civilized forms of government to despotic violence and the degeneration of law into a means of despotism. “It cannot be a matter of law to rule not only by right, but also contrary to law: the desire for violent subordination, of course, contradicts the idea of law.”
The main thing in the state is the citizen, that is, the one who participates in court and administration bears military service and performs priestly functions. Slaves were excluded from the political community, although, according to Aristotle, they should have constituted the majority of the population.
Aristotle undertook a gigantic study of the “constitution” - the political structure of 158 states (of which only one has survived - the “Athenian polity”).
The form of government is an administrative-territorial and national-state organization state power, revealing the relationships between individual parts of the state, in particular between central and local authorities.
There are two main forms of government: unitary and federal.
A unitary state has the following characteristics:
- 1) complete territorial unity of the state. This means that administrative-territorial units do not have political independence;
- 2) a single citizenship has been established for the population, territorial units do not have their own citizenship;
- 3) a unified structure of the state apparatus throughout the entire territory of the state, a unified judicial system;
- 4) unified system legislation for the entire state;
- 5) single-channel tax system, i.e. all taxes go to the center, and from there they are distributed centrally.
A unitary state, as a rule, differs quite high degree centralization. (Belarus, Finland, Italy, Poland, Greece, Türkiye, etc.).
A federation is a complex state consisting of various state entities with varying degrees of political independence. The federation is characterized by the following features:
- 1) the existence of supreme bodies of state power and administration common to the entire state and, at the same time, supreme bodies of state power and administration in the subjects of the federation;
- 2) the possibility of establishing “dual citizenship”, i.e. a citizen of each of the subjects is simultaneously a citizen of the federation;
- 3) two systems of legislation: federal and each subject, however, the priority of national acts is established over acts of subjects on issues within the jurisdiction of the federation and on issues of joint jurisdiction;
- 4) subjects of the federation may have their own judicial system along with the highest judicial bodies of the federation;
- 5) a two-channel tax system, which involves, along with general federal taxes and tax system subjects of the federation.
Currently, there are more than two dozen federal states in the world. They are formed on different grounds, have different structures, different degrees of development, etc. ( Russian Federation, USA, Germany, India, Belgium, Austria, Switzerland, Mexico, Canada, etc.). There are federations built on national and territorial grounds.
The following federations were mainly built on national grounds: former USSR, former Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia. This kind of federation turned out to be unviable.
The USA, Germany, etc. are formed on a territorial basis. Sometimes both characteristics are combined. For example, the federation in India is built on both territorial and religious-ethnic grounds.
Sometimes a confederation is called a form of government. However, strictly speaking, it is not a form of internal structure of a state, but an international legal association of sovereign states. States unite in a confederation to solve common tasks(economic, defensive, etc.), but without creating a single state. Members of the confederation remain subjects after unification international law, retain their sovereignty, citizenship, their own system government agencies, its own constitution and other legislation. The confederation creates common bodies to jointly resolve the issues for which they united. Acts adopted at the level of the confederation are subject to approval by the highest authorities of the united states. The confederation may disintegrate, or, on the contrary, transform into single state usually a federation (Switzerland, USA).
To summarize, we can note Aristotle’s enormous contribution to the science of government. In our opinion, by the form of the state, for the most part, Aristotle understood the modern form of government; in any case, to classify the forms of the state into correct and incorrect, it was precisely the criteria for determining the form of government that were used.
But at the same time, it should be noted that Aristotle also used signs of modern division to identify certain forms of state political regimes, territorial structure. Those. This is a collective concept that characterizes the entire structure of the state, the division of power, territory and the participation of the people in the administration of the country.
For modern science Aristotle's works are of great importance because... have still not lost their relevance and are justified.
Aristotle differs correct and irregular shapes states: in the correct forms, rulers have in mind the common good, in the wrong forms, only their own personal good.
The three correct forms of state are monarchical rule (royalty), aristocracy and polity, and the corresponding erroneous deviations from them are tyranny, oligarchy and democracy.
Each form, in turn, has several types, since various combinations of formative elements are possible. Aristotle calls the most correct form of state polity. In a polity, the majority rules in the interests of the common good. All other forms represent one or another deviation from polity. On the other hand, the polity itself, according to Aristotle, is, as it were, a mixture of oligarchy and democracy. This element of polity (the unification of the interests of the wealthy and the poor, wealth and freedom) is present in most states, i.e., it is generally characteristic of the state as a political communication. Of the irregular forms of government, tyranny is the worst.
Sharply criticizing extreme democracy, where supreme power belongs to the demos and not to the law, Aristotle characterizes with approval a moderate census democracy based on the reconciliation of rich and poor and the rule of law.
Polity combines the best aspects of oligarchy and democracy, but is free from their shortcomings and extremes. Polity - "medium" form state, and the “middle” element in it dominates in everything: in morals - moderation, in property - average wealth, in power - the middle stratum.
The main reason for the disturbances and coups in the state Aristotle sees the lack of proper equality. Revolutions are the result of a violation relative nature equality and distortion of the principle of political justice, which requires in some cases to be guided by quantitative equality, in others - by equality of dignity. Thus, democracy is based on the principle that relative equality entails absolute equality, and oligarchy proceeds from the principle that relative inequality also determines absolute inequality.
Such errors in the initial principles of state forms lead in the future to civil strife and rebellion.
AND ideal project nai the best state Aristotle notes that this is a logical construction and here we cannot seek the same accuracy that we have the right to apply to observations of facts that are accessible to research through experience.
The population of the best state should be sufficient and easily visible. The territory of the best state should be equally well oriented in relation to the sea and the mainland. The territory, in addition, must be sufficient to satisfy moderate needs.
In connection with the coverage of the topic wars Aristotle dwells on the problem in detail slavery. Military affairs, he emphasizes, are needed not for the enslavement of other peoples, but, first of all, in order to avoid falling into slavery ourselves. Although slaves are everywhere acquired through war, slavery does not rest on the right of war, but in the nature of things. War and violence in general, thus, without creating a new legal basis for slavery, is, according to Aristotle, only a means of acquiring those who are already slaves.
In general, Aristotle calls law as a political phenomenon “political law.” This, in particular, means the impossibility of non-political law, the absence of law in general in non-political (despotic) forms of government.
Political law It is divided into natural and conditional (volitional). Political law is partly natural, partly conditional. Natural law is one that has the same meaning everywhere and does not depend on recognition or non-recognition of it. Conditional right - initially it could be one way or the other without any significant difference, but once it is determined (this indifference ceases).”
In the teachings of Aristotle, both natural and conditional (will-established) law, although they differ from each other, both belong to the sphere of political phenomena and are of a political nature. The originality of Aristotle’s position is due to the fundamental circumstance that by “nature”, and in the question of law, he means precisely the political nature of man: after all, man, according to Aristotle, is by nature a political being.
In Aristotle's concept, conditional (will-established) law means everything that in subsequent usage began to be designated as positive (positive) law. He refers to conditional law as the establishment of laws and general agreements.
An essential component of the political quality of a law is its compliance with political justice and law. Consequently, this right must be expressed, embodied and respected in law. The deviation of law from law would mean, according to Aristotle’s concept, a departure from political forms to despotic violence, the degeneration of law into a means of despotism.
Political government is, according to Aristotle, rule of law and not people: rulers, even the best, are subject to feelings and affects, but the law is "balanced mind"
Aristotle (384-322 BC) was born in Stagira, which is why he is called Stagirite. Aristotle studied and then taught at Plato's Academy, and later opened his Lyceum in Athens. Aristotle was the tutor of the famous ancient commander Alexander the Great.
In his works - “Politics”, “Ethics”, “To Nicomachus”, “The Athenian Polity” - Aristotle distinguished equalizing(simple arithmetic equality, for example in civil transactions) and distributing(geometric equality, when distributing common goods “according to merit”) justice.
IN "Politics" Aristotle writes about slavery, family and property. He advocates slavery, considering it necessary. Slaves should include Hellenes-criminals (by law) and non-Hellenes-barbarians (by nature).
Aristotle believed family and property natural phenomena, prerequisites for human communication and the formation of a state. In a family, the father is the master, his power over his children is unquestionable, almost like the power of a slave owner over his slaves. Family is the basis of the state, starting point its development. Private property roots in human nature, in his natural self-love, in his passion for hoarding. It was from the standpoint of protecting private property and the family that Aristotle criticized both Platonic utopian projects of the state.
State There is product of natural development. Aristotle, like Plato, perceives the state as an integral organism based on human communication, because a person always needs communication. The family gradually grows into a village, which, in turn, eventually becomes a state.
Human, according to Aristotle, - "the animal is political", i.e. cannot live outside the state, outside society. A person creates a family for himself, but the political nature of a person is best realized in the state, i.e. a union of free and equal citizens capable of participating in the exercise of legislative and judicial powers.
Correct Forms of Government in the state (according to Aristotle): monarchy, aristocracy, polity. They are based on laws and are aimed at the common good. Wrong Forms of Government in the state: tyranny, oligarchy, democracy. They are characterized by lawlessness and common interests are not respected.
Ideal State, according to Aristotle, - the state of the “golden mean”, in which measure and moderation are observed in everything (from the number of laws to the size of the territory). The policy should be based on the middle class. Power in the state is divided between different social groups. Part of the land and slaves are in the common property of the entire people, the other part is in the private ownership of citizens; citizens must give excess products to those in need. The legislator must strive to provide citizens with peace and leisure.
Separates “bad” forms of state (tyranny, extreme oligarchy and ochlocracy) and “good” (monarchy, aristocracy and polity).
The best form of state, according to Aristotle, is polity - a combination of moderate oligarchy and moderate democracy, a state of the “middle class” (Aristotle’s ideal).
According to Aristotle, the state arises naturally to satisfy vital needs, and the purpose of its existence is to achieve the welfare of people. The state acts as the highest form of communication between people, thanks to which all other forms of human relations achieve perfection and completion.
The natural origin of the state is explained by the fact that nature instilled in all people the desire for state communication, and the first one who organized this communication did humanity the greatest good. Finding out the essence of man, the laws of his formation.
Aristotle believes that man, by nature, is a political being and he receives his completion, one might say, perfection, in the state. Nature has endowed man with intellectual and moral strength, which he can use for good and for evil.
If a person has moral principles, then he can achieve perfection. A person devoid of moral principles turns out to be the most wicked and savage creature, base in his sexual and taste instincts. Regarding the relationship and subordination of the triad: state, family, individual, Aristotle believes that “the state by its nature precedes the individual,” that the nature of the state comes before the nature of the family and the individual, and therefore “it is necessary that the whole precede the part.”
The state, and in this Aristotle follows Plato, represents a certain unity of its constituent elements, although not as centralized as in Plato. Aristotle characterizes the form of government as political system, personified by the supreme power in the state. Depending on the number of rulers (one, few, majority), the form of the state is determined. At the same time, there are both correct and incorrect forms of government. The criterion for correct forms of government is their service to the general interests of the state; for incorrect forms, it is the desire for personal good and benefit.
The three correct forms of the state are monarchical rule (royal power), aristocracy and politics (politics is the rule of the majority, combining the best aspects of aristocracy and democracy). Erroneous, incorrect - tyranny, oligarchy, democracy. In turn, each form has several varieties. Aristotle sees the main reason for the indignation of people, which sometimes leads to a change in forms of government, including as a result of coups d'etat, in the lack of equality in the state.
It is for the sake of achieving equality that coups and uprisings are carried out. On the issue of land, Aristotle believes that there should be two forms of land ownership: one involves the general use of land by the state, the other - private ownership by citizens who should, on a friendly basis, provide the grown products for the common use of other citizens.
Legislation in a state is an integral part of politics. Legislators must always take this into account in order to skillfully and adequately reflect in laws the uniqueness of a given political system and thereby contribute to the preservation and strengthening of the existing system of relations.
The historical significance of Aristotle's philosophy is that he:
He made significant adjustments to a number of provisions of Plato’s philosophy, criticizing the doctrine of “pure ideas”;
Gave a materialistic interpretation of the origin of the world and man;
Identified 10 philosophical categories;
Gave a definition of being through categories;
Defined the essence of matter;
He identified six types of state and gave the concept of an ideal type - polity;
In the field of social philosophy, Aristotle also put forward profound ideas, which gives reason to consider him as a thinker who stood at the origins of our modern ideas about society, state, family, man, law, and equality. Origin public life, Aristotle explains the formation of the state not by divine, but by earthly reasons.
Unlike Plato, who considered only ideas as all that exists, Aristotle interprets the relationship in being of the general and the individual, the real and the logical, from a different perspective. He does not contrast or separate them, as Plato did, but unites them. The essence, as well as that whose essence it is, cannot, according to Aristotle, exist separately.
The essence is in the object itself, and not outside it, and they form a single whole. Aristotle begins his teaching by clarifying what science or sciences should study existence. A science that, abstracting from individual properties of being (for example, quantity, movement), could cognize the essence of being, is philosophy. Unlike other sciences, which study various aspects and properties of being, philosophy studies what determines the essence of being.
Essence, Aristotle believes, is what underlies: in one sense it is matter, in another sense it is concept and form, and in third place it is that which consists of matter and form. In this case, by matter we mean something indefinite, which “in itself is not designated either as definite in essence, or as definite in quantity, or as possessing any of the other properties that definitely exist.” According to Aristotle, matter takes on determinacy only through form. Without form, matter acts only as a possibility, and only by acquiring form does it turn into reality.
Essence- the cause of not only actually existing, but also future existence.
Within this paradigm, Aristotle defines four causes that determine being:
1. The essence and essence of being, thanks to which a thing is what it is;
2. Matter and substratum are that from which everything arises;
3. Motive cause, meaning the principle of movement;
4. Achieving the set goal and benefit as a natural result of activity.
Aristotle's ideas about knowledge are significantly intertwined with his logical teaching and dialectics and are supplemented by them. In the field of knowledge, Aristotle not only recognized the importance of dialogue, dispute, discussion in achieving truth, but also put forward new principles and ideas about knowledge and, in particular, the doctrine of plausible and probabilistic or dialectical knowledge, leading to reliable or apodictic knowledge. According to Aristotle, probabilistic and plausible knowledge is available to dialectics, and true knowledge, built on necessarily true provisions, is inherent only in apodictic knowledge.
Of course, “apodictic” and “dialectical” are not opposed to each other, they are interconnected. Dialectical knowledge, based on sensory perception, emanating from experience and moving in the area of incompatible opposites, provides only probabilistic knowledge, that is, a more or less plausible opinion about the subject of research. In order to give this knowledge a greater degree of reliability, one should compare various opinions and judgments that exist or are put forward to identify the essence of the phenomenon being cognized. However, despite all these techniques, it is impossible to obtain reliable knowledge in this way.
True knowledge, according to Aristotle, is achieved not through sensory perception or experience, but through the activity of the mind, which has the necessary abilities to achieve truth.
These qualities of the mind are not inherent in a person from birth. They exist for him potentially. In order for these abilities to manifest themselves, it is necessary to purposefully collect facts, concentrate the mind on studying the essence of these facts, and only then will true knowledge become possible.
Since from the abilities of thinking, possessing which, we know the truth, Aristotle believes, some always comprehend the truth, while others also lead to errors (for example, opinion and reasoning), while the truth is always given by science and mind, then no other kind of knowledge ), other than the mind, is not more accurate than science. Aristotle's theory of knowledge is closely related to his logic. Although Aristotle's logic is formal in content, it is multidisciplinary, since it includes the doctrine of being and the doctrine of truth and knowledge.
The search for truth is carried out through syllogisms (inferences) using induction and deduction. An essential element of the search for truth are Aristotle’s ten categories (essence, quantity, quality, relation, place, time, position, state, action, suffering), which he views as closely interconnected with each other, mobile and fluid.
Here is one example showing how, with the help of logical analysis, you can know the truth. From two syllogisms: “all men are mortal” and “Socrates is a man,” we can conclude that “Socrates is mortal.” It is impossible not to note Aristotle's contribution to the classification of sciences. Before Aristotle, although various sciences already existed, they were scattered, distant from each other, and their direction was not defined.
Naturally, this created certain difficulties both in their study, and in defining their subject, and in the field of application. Aristotle was the first to conduct an inventory of the existing sciences and determine their direction. He divided the existing sciences into three groups: theoretical, which included physics, mathematics and philosophy; practical or normative, within which politics is one of the most important; poetic sciences that regulate the production of various objects.
Made a significant contribution to the development of logic (gave the concept deductive method- from the particular to the general, substantiated the system of syllogisms - a conclusion from two or more premises of a conclusion).
Forms of government depend on who is recognized as a citizen, or on the number of rulers. It is impossible, according to Aristotle, to recognize as citizens all those who are useful to the state. From among the citizens it is necessary to eliminate not only slaves, but also those who, due to lack of wealth, leisure, and education, are not able to independently come to reasonable decisions. These are foreigners, artisans, traders, sailors.
Aristotle does not give civil rights to women.
Citizens are those “who participate in legislative and judicial activities.” There may not be complete equality between them. A full citizen is one who can be elected to any position. A sign of a good citizen may be practical knowledge organization and life of the policy both as a subject and as an official.
Aristotle divides states into three groups according to the number of people involved in government: where one person rules, the few and the majority. But to the numerical criterion he adds an ethical one. Depending on whether the ruler thinks about the common good or cares only about his own interests, forms of government can be right or wrong (perverted).
Based on the combination of these two criteria, Aristotle identifies and characterizes six forms of government. The correct rule of one person is called monarchy, and the incorrect one is called tyranny. The correct power of the few is an aristocracy, and the wrong is an oligarchy. The correct rule of the majority is called polity, and the incorrect one is called democracy.
Monarchy is the real concentration of power in the hands of one person. Aristotle has no predilection for this form. He prefers the authority of the best laws to the authority of the best husband. For a monarchy to be correct, the king must be a great man.
Aristotle considers irregular monarchy (tyranny) to be the worst form of government.
The philosopher gives preference to aristocracy - the power of a limited number of morally and intellectually best persons. To prevent the aristocracy from degenerating, you need a group of very good people, which is rare. In the absence of prominent rulers, the aristocracy degenerates into an oligarchy.
In an oligarchy, the rich dominate. A high property qualification pushes the majority of the population away from power. Lawlessness and arbitrariness reign. In an oligarchy there is complete inequality. Aristotle considers this unfair. But, according to the philosopher, the opposite principle is also unfair - complete equality, which is characteristic of democracy.
Rich and poor are essential elements of the state. Depending on the predominance of one or the other, the corresponding political form is established. The hallmark of an oligarchy is not so much the power of a minority as the power of wealth. Democracy is characterized by the predominance of the poor in the power structure.
Aristotle identifies several types of democracy. All citizens, regardless of their property status can participate as equals in the implementation supreme power or there may be a low property qualification.
The worst kind of democracy is one when the people rule without relying on laws, elevating their every decision into law. Lawlessness makes this type of power similar to tyranny and oligarchy.
Aristotle is selective about democracy. The philosopher approved of moderate census democracy. Such democracy, according to Aristotle, existed in Greece during the reign of Solon at the beginning of the 6th century BC. This ruler divided all citizens depending on their condition into four categories.
Aristotle condemned the order established in Greece under Pericles, since he did not recognize egalitarian justice. The thinker believed that most poor people have neither education nor leisure to engage in management matters. Their poverty creates conditions for bribery and group squabbles.
Democracy is an unstable form of government, but Aristotle puts it above oligarchy and even aristocracy, because he believes: in the multitude of people there is in each a piece of either talent or wisdom.
Polity is a variant of majority rule. It combines the advantages of oligarchy and democracy; this is the golden mean that Aristotle strived for. Only persons with average income are recognized as citizens. They participate in the national assembly and elect magistrates. A pure form of polity is rare, as it requires a strong middle class.
According to Aristotle, the cause of coups and violent changes in forms of government is a violation of justice, the absolutization of the principle underlying the form of government. For example, in democracy this is the absolutization of equality. Aristotle associates revolutions with social contradictions. The reasons for the coups are the strengthening of one of the classes, the weakness of the middle class.
In his works, the philosopher gives advice on how to strengthen different shapes board. But he considers the establishment of a polity to be the best way to ensure stability.
Like all of Aristotle's philosophy, his doctrine of justice bore the stamp of the thinker's attraction to materialism. By justice, he understood, on the one hand, the moral quality of a person - virtue, and on the other - social category, indicating the nature of social relations. Justice as a social category acts as a the most important prerequisite public institutions he approves. Aristotle derived his ideas about such justice from real life Athenian slave-owning democracy with its developed exchange relations. It is this circumstance that explains his clear division of justice into two types: equalizing and distributive (rewarding). Justice of the first type is one of the manifestations of the direct relationship of equivalents, for its essence is manifested “in the equalization of what constitutes the object of exchange.” 12 Materialistic conjecture about economic content The category of justice is the undoubted merit of Aristotle, which K. Marx pointed out. K. Marx. Capital, vol. I. M., Gospolitizdat, 1963, pp. 68--70. At the same time, Aristotle, in his doctrine of justice, naturally could not help but reflect those class relations of inequality that had developed in the Athenian state. A reflection of this inequality was his concept of distributive justice, which should reward “according to its merits,” that is, express the ratio of unequal measures determined by the greater or lesser social merits of people. Aristotle included virtue and wealth among these virtues. In his opinion, giving equal rights to unequal people would be injustice and therefore he justified the social inequality inherent in Athenian democracy.
The literature indicated that with the division of justice into equalizing and distributive, Aristotle connected the difference between private and public law (equalizing justice operates in the sphere of private law, distributive justice in the public sphere) and used the doctrine of justice to substantiate his political theory. S. F. Kechekyan. Methodological issues in the history of political doctrines. “Questions of Philosophy”, 1962, No. 2, p. 95. It should be noted, however, that, as it seems to us, the ancient philosopher distinguished between law and justice and did not always consider them identical. Thus, Aristotle spoke about justice (calling it “truth” and emphasizing that the latter is the same justice in a special manifestation), which does not insist on the letter of formal law even in those cases where the law speaks in favor of a person’s own interest. It is this justice that forces one to voluntarily yield to the internally fair claim of another person. 15
Aristotle's teaching on justice corresponded to the socio-political views of the widest circles of Athenian slave owners and did not go beyond their class ideology. But his analysis of justice as an objective category certainly had a progressive character, which especially emerged later, during the era of the bourgeoisie’s struggle against feudalism.
An even more decisive opposition to Plato’s idealistic approach to justice was the teaching of Epicurus, who acted as a consistent enemy of Platonism. 16 Epicurus considered justice as a social category, the origin of which he associated with the presence of human society. “Justice, which comes from nature,” he said, “is an agreement about the useful - with the goal of not harming each other and not suffering harm.” His statement about the contractual origin of justice, as well as that among animals “there is nothing just or unjust,” is convincing evidence that he completely excluded the divine principle in justice, seeing the exclusively earthly origin of the latter. This was also evidenced by his desire to emphasize its objective and universal nature (justice is the same for everyone) and an indication of the dependence of the concept of justice “on” individual characteristics country and any other circumstances." Epicurus has a progressive idea about the need for the law to correspond to the benefits of earthly communication between people, which is the main criterion of justice. He clearly understood the difference between the formal requirement of the law and justice, which in his view acted as the most important principle of human coexistence.