• Choose a category
• All
• Classic-Fiction

By Root 4999 0

its common identity, its life and its will. This public person, so formed by the union of all other persons, formerly took the name of city (polis) , and now takes that of Republic or body politic; it is called by its members State when passive, Sovereign when active, and Power when compared with others like itself. Those who are associated in it take collectively the name of people, and severally are called citizens, as sharing in the sovereign power, and subjects, as being under the laws of the State. But these terms are often confused and taken one for another: it is enough to know how to distinguish them when they are being used with precision.

We will ask you to entertain two sets of questions about these two texts, after which we will suggest some tentative conclusions that we believe can justifiably be drawn from the texts.

Test G : Here is the fi rst set of questions about Aristotle and Rousseau

I. Aristotle identifies three different types of human association. What are they?

2. These three types of association have certain things in common and also diHer in significant respects. What do they have in common and how do they diHer?

3. The three types of association diHer in regard to their inclusiveness. Can you order them on a scale going from less to more inclusive?

4. All three types of association aim at fulfilling some Appendix B 41 1

natural need-that is, they achieve some good. The good achieved by the family-that is, the security of its members and the perpetuation of the race-is also achieved by the village, but in a higher degree. Is the good aimed at or achieved by the state merely the same good in an even higher degree, or is it a different good altogether?

5. Another way to get at this difference is by still another question. Given that, for Aristotle, all three types of association are natural, are they natural in the same way?

6. Before turning to some questions about Rousseau in this first set of questions, we must mention the one remark of Aristotle's that raises a difficulty. Aristotle praises highly the man who first founded the state. Would he speak similarly of the man who first founded the family or the village?

7. What is the main problem that Rousseau poses about the state?

8. Does Rousseau pose this same problem about the family?

9. What is the opposite of the natural for Rousseau?

10. What is the basic or founding convention that, for Rousseau, makes the state legitimate?

Tum to p. 416 for the answers to Test G.

After this first set of questions about the two texts, we appear to have arrived at an interpretation of the two texts that sees them in disagreement on the question we have been considering. That question is, as you will recall: Is the state natural, or is it conventional or artificial? Rousseau appears to say that the state is conventional or artificial; Aristotle appears to say that it is natural.

Now take a few moments to consider whether this interpretation is correct. Is there anything about the problematic remark of Aristotle's we mentioned that calls the interpretation in doubt? Is there anything that Rousseau says that we have'

not discussed and that also must cause us to doubt this interpretation?

41 2 HOW TO READ A BOOK

If you see why this interpretation is not correct, you will probably already have anticipated the few remaining questions we want to ask.

Test H : Here is the second set of questions 1. For Rousseau, is the state natural as well as conventional?

2. Does Aristotle agree in this?

3. Can this basic agreement between Aristotle and Rousseau be extended to further points?

4. In the answer to the last question, we spoke of the

"good" that the state achieves which cannot be achieved without it. Is this "good" the same for Rousseau as for Aristotle?

5. One final question. Does the agreement we have found on our primary question mean that these two texts, short as they are, are in agreement on all points?

Tum to p. 418 for the answers to Test H.

We said at the beginning of this exercise that there are certain conclusions that can justifiably