home

Political doctrines of ancient Greece.

In the fifth grade, we all studied the history of the Ancient World: "Ancient Egypt", "Ancient Greece", "Roman Empire", etc. When we studied the history of Ancient Greece, as evidence of the highest culture of the ancient "Greeks" in the textbook was placed " ancient Greek" marble sculpture of a young girl in a tunic with a small book in her right hand! In the fifth grade, we still knew little, but only a blind man could not admire the beauty of the marble statue of a girl. Impeccable forms, grace frozen in marble, a correct, very beautiful face with purely European features ... In short - a wonderful creation of human hands!

Everyone looked at the photo of this sculpture in the textbook, and no one had any questions. Of course, we are children, we still didn’t know a lot, didn’t read, but the history teacher didn’t have any questions either. And the most interesting thing is not only for our historian, who, by the way, loved her subject very much, but also for all history teachers in schools throughout the Soviet Union, associate professors and professors in pedagogical universities, and for the "historians" themselves who wrote textbooks and for future history teachers, and for secondary schools ...

If everything seems to be clear with us, children, then with everyone else, to put it mildly, not quite!

Much later, when I had already graduated from school, university, as I read certain books on history, genetics, anthropology, etc., I gradually grew indignant at such a grandiose falsification, from such a blatant lie that was very well thought out! And what is most interesting is that the exposure of this very lie, fragment by fragment, could be found back in school years, in the same history books.

But... all these fragments of truth were scattered in history textbooks for different years of study, and genetics, anthropology, were practically not studied at school. As a result of all this, the fifth graders looked with delight at the beautiful “ancient Greek” statue with a small book in its hand and ... NO ONE WERE SURPRISED BY ALL THIS!

And why be surprised, someone might ask, well, a marble girl is holding a small, such a neat book in her hand, so what's the big deal? Who hasn't seen small books, as well as medium, large, hardcover or paperback? Yes, everyone saw it, including first graders and even kindergarten children! Maybe not everyone could read these books, but they saw almost everything! Familiar to everyone picture - a book in hand! That's just the point, that habitual "PICTURE"! So what's weird about that!?

It seems to be nothing ... except for a few "tiny" such nuances!

LITTLE "NUANCE" FIRST - paper was invented in Spain in the XI century AD, and before that paper books did not exist! There were books, but they were made of animal skin, specially dressed and processed, and such sheets of books were called PARCHMENTS! Such books cost a lot of money, were very rare and weighed such books ... tens and sometimes hundreds of kilograms, and were very impressive in size, so a fragile girl could NOT gracefully hold such a book with her right hand, even theoretically! And if we take into account the real dimensions and their weight in real ancient time, then we have to admit that the girl holding the book in her hand must clearly be from the tribe of TITANS! But, according to the "ancient Greek" mythology, God Zeus defeated the titans and sent them to TARTAR!!!

So the "ancient Greek" architects could not sculpt a girl-titan in marble! But the "nuances" do not end there!

LITTLE "NUANCE" SECOND - the girl holds in her hand an obviously published typographically book! The sculptor clearly showed the hardcover of a small book with evenly cut pages! One can imagine that a fragile, graceful, romantic girl is holding a small volume of poetry in her hand!

For reference - books began to be printed in Europe not earlier than the 15th-16th centuries of our era and ... not in Greece! So, whatever one may say, but the marble statue, which is placed in the textbook of the history of the Ancient World, was created NOT EARLIER XV CENTURY AD!!! This is from a technical point of view! But that's not all!

And now - about the THIRD LITTLE "NUANCE"!

Anthropologically, the marble girl belongs to the Caucasoid race (white race), while the population of modern Greece belongs to a special subrace - the Mediterranean! Which is characterized by a rather significant admixture of the Negroid race! And this subrace arose as a result of a long mixing of the Caucasoid and Negroid races in the zone of their direct contact! But, according to modern "history", the so-called "Ancient" Greece was never conquered by Negroid tribes, and the "ancient Greeks" themselves never conquered the black continent - Africa! How, then, did the Mediterranean sub-race appear?

But the territory of modern Greece was first conquered by representatives of another sub-racial type only during the conquest of the Roman Empire by the Turks in 1453 AD! And besides, part of the so-called Turks belonged to another sub-race - the Semitic! And a fairly large part of the Turks belonged to the representatives of the Caucasoid race - mainly to the Slavic tribes who professed Islam !!! And if you read Plato (“Dialogues”) carefully, then it clearly follows from them that the HELLENES lived on the territory of modern Greece, whom he refers to the descendants of the PELASGI - the ancient Slavs and derives them from the same root with the Antes - the creators of the legendary Antlany (Atlantis) !

But ... the veil of the familiar hides the truth from the relevant professionals! And this is primarily due to the fact that after school, in which the veil of the familiar serves as a powerful smoke screen from the truth, future professionals begin to study a very narrow interval of the past and for a single country or period and ... almost never streams of whole Pictures! And that is why practically no one can add TWO PLUS TWO, as paradoxical as it sounds!

Material taken from LitMir - Digital Library

Introduction

1. A Brief Political History of Ancient Greece

2. Political thought of the early period (IX-VI centuries BC)

3. The heyday of political thought (V - first half of the 4th century BC)

4. Political thought of the Hellenistic period (second half of the 4th - 2nd century BC)

Conclusion

Bibliography

Introduction

The ideas and views of thinkers, expressed in theoretical form, are part of the political consciousness of the era of antiquity. Their features are connected with the whole system of socio-cultural and economic factors in which this or that thinker lived and worked. But at the same time, many of these ideas are of enduring importance. Together they form the foundation on which the thinkers of subsequent epochs rely when they build the edifice of a new political theory. Therefore, the study of the history of political thought facilitates the understanding of contemporary political problems.

Political knowledge in antiquity existed in a philosophical and ethical form. The political ideas of ancient Greek thinkers are an integral part of their cosmocentric worldview, which is dominated by the idea of the integrity of the world, the relationship of nature, society and man, the similarity of their structures, the common foundations of all levels of life. There is still no differentiation between society and politics in them; politics is an expression of the integral properties of society. The real basis for constructing the first political concepts of the thinkers of antiquity is the polis-city-state, in which there was no clear delineation of the functions and elements of the state and society. Each citizen of the policy acts both as a private person, a member of the urban community, and as a subject of state and public life, participating in the management process. The word "politics" literally meant "participation in the management of the policy."

The purpose of this work is to study the political views of ancient Greek thinkers. The tasks include consideration of three main periods in the development of political thought: early (IX-VI centuries BC), the heyday of political thought (V-first half of the 4th century BC), Hellenistic period (second half of the 4th- II century BC)

1. A Brief Political History of Ancient Greece

Natural conditions largely contributed to the formation of the originality of the Greek statehood. The mountainous terrain, the presence of minerals, a convenient sea coast, an ice-free sea with many islands, the absence of large rivers, the predominance of rocky soils - all this favored the formation of small independent states. political thought ancient greece

The first cities in Greece arose on the islands of the Aegean Sea in the 3rd millennium BC. Around this time, the so-called Minoan civilization was formed on the island of Crete. Already in the XXI century BC. e. on Crete, the construction of palaces begins, which were political, economic, religious and cultural centers.

On the territory of mainland Greece at the beginning of the 2nd millennium BC. under the influence of the Minoan culture, their own states arose, the centers of which were Mycenae, Tiryns, Pylos, Athens, Thebes. The political history of this time is little known, the biggest event was the Trojan War at the turn of the 13th-12th centuries BC.

XI-IX centuries BC in Greece, historians call the "dark ages". During this period, the Greek lands were captured by the tribes of the Dorians, who were still at the stage of decomposition of primitive society. In general, during this period, the development of Greece temporarily slowed down, but it was precisely at this time that the prerequisites for the further socio-political flourishing of the Greek lands were formed.

In the VIII-VI centuries. BC e. the formation of Greek policies. The policy was a combination of private landowners, as well as citizens engaged in various trades and crafts, who, being its full members, had the right to property. The inhabitants of the policies were divided into citizens of the policy, slaves and representatives of the free population who did not have civil rights. For most policies, the first stage is characterized by a struggle between the demos (from the Greek people) and the aristocracy. From the end of the 8th century BC. in many policies, to normalize the situation, a special form of state power is established - tyranny, that is, one-man rule. By the end of the 6th century, tyranny had been abolished in most polises and two main types of polis structure had developed: democracy and oligarchy.

The crisis of ancient Greek policies belongs to the socio-political sphere and is associated with the active development of the economy. The growth of commodity-money relations contributed to the growing role of non-citizens in the life of city-states, the growing role of money, the destruction of the traditional collectivist polis morality, the aggravation of social struggle in the policies, and constant conflicts between them. All this weakened Greece, it was conquered by the Macedonian kings, then divided into many independent states and ended up in the power of the Roman Empire .

All these processes were reflected and theoretically comprehended in the political teachings of Ancient Greece.

2. Political thought of the early period (IX-VI centuries BC)

The early period of the emergence and development of political thought in Ancient Greece (IX-IV century BC) is associated with the time of the emergence of statehood. During this period, there is a noticeable rationalization of political ideas and a philosophical approach to the problems of state and law is formed.

The development of political theories began with attempts to rationalize the political part in myths: from the marriage of Zeus with Themis, according to the theogony of Hesiod, two daughters are born - Dike, i.e. truth and justice, coinciding with positively existing laws and customs, and Eunomia, i.e. goodness

In the poems of Homer and Geosidas, myths lose their sacred meaning and begin to be subjected to ethical and political interpretation. In line with this interpretation, there was an idea that the assertion of the principles of justice, legality and city life is associated with the establishment of the power of the Olympian gods. Ideas about the ethical and moral-legal order in human affairs and relations are further developed by the so-called seven wise men of ancient Greece. Thales, Pitacus, Periander, Byant, Solon, Cleobulus and Chilo are usually ranked among them. The sages persistently emphasized the dominance of just laws in the life of the city. Some of them, being rulers or legislators, made great efforts to realize their political and legal ideals. So, Biant considered the best state system to be one in which citizens are afraid of the law to the same extent as they would be afraid of a tyrant. .

The famous statesman and legislator Solon significantly reformed the socio-political system of the Athenian polis. In accordance with the differences in the property status of the Athenian population, he divided it into four classes: pentakosiomedimni, horsemen, zeugites, and fetes. Representatives of the first three classes were given access to all government positions, fetes could only participate in the people's assembly and courts. The newly established Council of Four Hundred (100 members from each of the four Athenian phyla) significantly undermined the dominant role of the Areopagus, which was the stronghold of the aristocracy. The moderate democracy introduced by Solon was permeated with the idea of a compromise between the nobility and the demos, the rich and the poor. In his elegies, he openly acknowledged the unwillingness to pander to the excessive claims of one of the parties to the detriment of the other. According to Solon, the state needs, first of all, a legal order, while the law, in his opinion, is characterized as a combination of law and force, and we are talking about the official power of the policy, and not about the actual power of the struggling parties or individuals.

Pythagoras and his followers came up with the idea of transforming social and political orders. Criticizing democracy, they substantiated the aristocratic ideals of the rule of the "best" - the intellectual and moral elite.

When covering the problems of justice, the Pythagoreans were the first to begin the theoretical development of the concept of "equality", as retribution to equals for equals. The meaning of justice here varies depending on the nature of those specific relationships in which people find themselves.

The ideal of the Pythagoreans is a policy in which fair laws prevail. Pythagoras taught that after the deity, parents and laws should be respected most of all, and they did not welcome legislative innovations, believing that it is best to live "in paternal customs and laws, even if they would be a little worse than others."

The Pythagoreans considered anarchy to be the worst evil, noting that a person by nature cannot do without guidance and proper education.

A prominent place in the history of ancient political thought is occupied by the views of Heraclitus. In his views, Heraclitus proceeded from the fact that although thinking is inherent in everyone, however, most people do not understand the universal logos (the all-controlling mind), which must be followed. Proceeding from this, he distinguishes between the wise and the unreasonable, the best and the worst, and the moral and political assessment of people by Heraclitus is a consequence of the degree of intellectual comprehension of the logos by people. Socio-political inequality is justified by him as well as the inevitable legitimate and just result of the general struggle.

Criticizing democracy, where the crowd rules and there is no place for the best, Heraclitus advocated the rule of the best. "One for me," he said, "ten thousand if he's the best." That is, for a decision to be made, it is not at all necessary that it be approved by the people's assembly. To one, but "better", the understanding of the logos is more accessible than to many.

The aristocratic nature of the views of Pythagoras and Heraclitus differed significantly from the ideology of the old nobility (blood aristocracy). Both chose an intellectual, and not a natural (by birth) criterion for determining what is “best”, “noble”. Thanks to such a modernization of the concept of "aristocrat", the aristocracy from a naturally closed caste became, as it were, an open class, access to which was made dependent on the personal merits and efforts of each.

3. The heyday of political thought (V - first half of the 4th century BC)

The development of political thought in the 5th century was greatly facilitated by the deepening of the philosophical and social analysis of the problems of society,

states and politicians.

One of the first attempts to consider the emergence and formation of man and society as part of the natural process of world development is found in Democritus. In the course of this process, people gradually, under the influence of need, imitating nature and animals, relying on their own experience, acquired all the basic knowledge and skills necessary for social life. Thus, human society appears after a long evolution as the result of a progressive change in the initial state of nature. In this sense, society and the polis are created artificially, and not given by nature. However, their origin is a naturally necessary, and not a random process. The correctly understood nature of the connection between the artificial and the natural is, according to Democritus, the criterion of justice in politics. In this sense, he considers unjust everything that is contrary to nature.

In the state, according to Democritus, the common good and justice are represented. The interests of the state are above all, and the concerns of citizens should be directed towards its better organization and management.

Certain ideas about politics were expressed by many ancient thinkers of the 5th-4th centuries BC, but more or less detailed ideas about politics were formulated by sophists. Before them, the ancient worldview was dominated by ideas about the inviolability of the established world order: a person is part of the cosmos and all social relations are a manifestation of cosmic laws. Sophists for the first time openly declared that public life, the world of politics - the work of human hands - "man is the measure of all things." The Sophists emphasized the conventionality of legal norms and state institutions. “Justice is nothing but the benefit of the strong”, “what seems to every state fair and beautiful, that is what it is for it” (Protogoras). “Each government establishes laws that are useful for itself: democracy - democratic, tyranny - tyrannical, the rest do the same” (Arazimakh).

The political ethics of Socrates was a kind of result of the previous development of ancient Greek political thought and at the same time served as the starting point for its further movement to such heights as the political philosophy of Plato and the political science of Aristotle. The political ideal of Socrates is a state-polis, in which, of course, laws that are just in nature prevail. Persistently preaching the need to comply with city laws, Socrates connects with this the unanimity of citizens, without which, in his opinion, neither the state can stand well, nor the house can be happily managed. Moreover, by "unanimity" he means the devotion and obedience of the members of the policy to the laws, but not the unification of tastes, opinions and views of people. However, Socrates' calls for obedience to the law did not mean that he considered any arbitrary decision and order of the authorities to be a law to be observed. So, when the tyrannical "rule of thirty" was established in Athens, two of these rulers, namely Critias and Charicles, having assumed the functions of legislators, adopted a "law" that forbade "teaching the art of speaking." Referring to this ban, the legislators threatened the philosopher with reprisals for his conversations with young people. But Socrates openly ridiculed the absurdity of the mentioned "law" and was, of course, very far from being able to follow it. Socrates' provisions about the coincidence of the lawful and the just, his praise of the legality and reasonableness of the polis orders meant, rather, the desired ideal state of affairs, rather than the real one. For Socrates, the main virtue of his moral philosophy is knowledge, therefore the main principle in the political and legal sphere for him is formulated as follows: "Those who know should rule." This requirement corresponds to the philosophical ideas of Socrates about the reasonable and just principles of the state and law and is critically addressed by him to all forms of political organization.

Plato, an outstanding thinker of the ancient world, criticized the political ideas of the sophists. Plato considered the doctrine of the sophists to be incorrect and harmful to society, since, in his opinion, they incline people to disobey the government. In contrast to the legal relativism of the sophists, Plato sought to affirm the idea of the inviolability of state institutions.

In his works "State", "Laws" Plato for the first time formulated a holistic doctrine of the social structure, in which the central place is occupied by ideas about the ideal state.

In the dialogue "The State", Plato considered the ideal state system by analogy with the cosmos and the human soul. Just as there are three principles in the human soul, so there must be three estates in the state. The rational beginning of the soul in an ideal state corresponds to rulers-philosophers, the furious beginning - warriors, the lustful - farmers and artisans. Class division of society Plato declared a condition for the strength of the state as a joint settlement of citizens. Unauthorized transition from a lower class to a higher one is unacceptable and is the greatest crime, for each person must be engaged in the work to which he is destined by nature. "Mind your own business and not interfere with others - this is justice."

At the head of the state, Plato argued, it is necessary to put philosophers involved in the eternal good and capable of embodying the heavenly world of ideas in earthly life. “Until philosophers, or the so-called kings and lords, reign in the states, it is not noble and thorough to philosophize, and this will not merge together state power and philosophy - until then the state will not get rid of the evils ». Thus, in the project of the ideal organization of power, Plato departs from the principles of the "aristocracy of the blood" and replaces it with the "aristocracy of the spirit." Substantiating this idea, he endowed the philosopher-rulers with the qualities of a spiritual elite - intellectual exclusivity, moral perfection, etc.

Plato did not attach much importance to the mechanism of exercising power in the dialogue "State". In particular, with regard to the form of government in a model state, it is only said that it can be either a monarchy, if one philosopher rules, or an aristocracy, if there are several rulers. The main attention is paid to the problems of education and lifestyle of citizens. In order to achieve unanimity and cohesion of the two upper classes, which together form the class of guardians of the state, Plato establishes for them a community of property and life. They must live and eat together, as during military campaigns. The guards are forbidden to have a family; a community of wives and children is introduced for them.

Plato covered the way of life of the third estate from the point of view of the diversity of social needs and the division of labor. Citizens of the third estate were allowed to have private property, money, trade in the markets, etc. The production activity of farmers and artisans was supposed to be maintained at a level that would ensure an average income for all members of society and at the same time exclude the possibility of the rich rising above the guards. Overcoming property stratification in society is the most important socio-economic feature of the ideal system, which distinguishes it from all other vicious states.

Describing the perverted forms of the state, Plato arranged them in order of increasing degradation in comparison with the ideal. The degeneration of the aristocracy of the wise, according to him, entails the establishment of private property and the enslavement of free farmers from the third estate. This is how timocracy arises (from "time" - honor), the domination of the strongest warriors. A state with timocratic rule will forever fight.

The next type of government - the oligarchy - appears as a result of the accumulation of wealth from private individuals. This system is based on a property qualification. A few rich people seize power, while the poor do not participate in governance. The oligarchic state, torn apart by the enmity of the rich and the poor, will constantly be at war with itself.

The victory of the poor leads to the establishment of democracy - the power of the people. Public positions in a democracy are filled by lot, as a result of which the state becomes intoxicated with freedom in its undiluted form, beyond all measure. Self-will and anarchy reign in a democracy.

Finally, excessive freedom turns into its opposite - excessive slavery. Tyranny is established, the worst kind of state. The power of tyrants rests on treachery and violence. The tyrannical system is the most serious disease of the state, the complete absence of any virtues in it. Plato considered the damage to human morals to be the main reason for the change of all forms of the state. He associated the way out of the vicious states of society with a return to the original system - the rule of the wise.

After Plato's failed attempt to realize in Syracuse, the Greek colony in Sicily, the initial project of the best state, he creates the dialogue "Laws". In the "Laws" Plato depicts the "second in dignity" state system, bringing it closer to the reality of the Greek policies.

First, Plato renounces the collective property of philosophers and warriors and establishes a single procedure for the use of property by citizens. For the convenience of calculations (when filling government positions, recruiting troops, etc.), the exact number of citizens is provided - 5040. This number includes only land owners; craftsmen and merchants do not have civil rights.

Secondly, the division of citizens into estates is replaced by gradation according to the property qualification. Citizens acquire political rights depending on the amount of property by enrolling in one of four classes. Having become rich or impoverished, they move to another class. Together, the citizens form the ruling class. In addition to employment in their own household, they are charged with the duty of serving in the army, the administration of certain government posts, participation in joint meals (sissitia), sacrifices, etc.

Fourthly, Plato describes in detail in the dialogue the organization of state power and the laws of the best order. Unlike the first project, the ideas of a mixed form of the state and a combination of moral methods of exercising power with legal ones are carried out here.

Plato calls the ideal state structure the board, where the beginnings of democracy and monarchy are combined. These principles include: the democratic principle of arithmetic equality (elections by majority vote) and the monarchical principle of geometric equality (selection on merit and merit). The democratic principles of the state find their expression in the activities of the people's assembly. On a combination of democratic and monarchical principles, the elections of a college of 37 rulers and a Council of 360 members are built. Closes the hierarchy of state bodies secret "night meeting", which includes 10 of the wisest and most elderly guards. They are given the supreme power in the state.

All elected state bodies and rulers are required to act in strict accordance with the law. As for the sages from the "night meeting", they are involved in divine truth and in this sense are above the law. Having agreed that public life must be regulated by the norms of written law, Plato, for his own ideological reasons, could not allow the rule of law over religious morality. “After all, if, by the will of divine fate, a person ever appeared who was capable enough by nature to assimilate these views,” wrote Plato, “then he would not at all need laws that would govern him. Neither the law, nor any no order is superior to knowledge."

In the dialogue "Politician" Plato singled out the forms of the state based on the law. According to him, the monarchy, aristocracy and democracy are based on the law, while tyranny, oligarchy and perverted democracy are governed contrary to the laws and customs existing in them. However, all of the listed forms of government, as emphasized in the dialogue, are deviations from the ideal, "genuine" state, where the politician alone exercises power, "guided by knowledge."

The political thought of antiquity was further developed in the works of Aristotle, a student and opponent of Plato. The main work of Aristotle in the field of political theory is the treatise "Politics".

His expression “man is a political animal”, that is, related to the city-state-polis, became popular. Therefore, we can say that for Aristotle, a person is by nature a state being, therefore, politics is primarily a sphere of state relations, and a person is a citizen by his very nature.

The state, according to Aristotle, is formed as a result of people's natural attraction to communication. The first type of communication, partly characteristic of animals, is the family; from several families a village or clan arises; finally, the union of several villages constitutes the state - the highest form of human community. In the state, the inclination to live together that was originally inherent in people is fully realized.

Unlike the family and the village, based on the desire to procreate and on paternal authority, the state is formed through moral communication between people. The political community relies on the unanimity of citizens in regard to virtue. The state is not a community of residence, it is not created to prevent mutual insults or for the sake of convenience of exchange. Of course, all these conditions must be present for the existence of the state, but even with all of them taken together, there will still be no state; it appears only when communication is formed between families and clans for the sake of a good life. As the most perfect form of common life, the state teleologically precedes the family and the village, i.e. is the purpose of their existence.

Summing up his reasoning about the various types of hostel, Aristotle gives the state the following definition: the state is "the communication of people like each other in order to achieve the best possible life." Aristotle put quite specific content into this definition. People here meant only free citizens of the Greek city-states. He did not consider barbarians and slaves worthy of communication with the citizens of the state. Undeveloped spiritually, the barbarians are incapable of state life; their destiny is to be slaves to the Greeks. "The barbarian and the slave are by nature identical concepts."

Aristotle makes several arguments in support of slavery. Decisive among them are the natural (natural) differences between people. On the pages of the "Politics" it is repeatedly emphasized that slavery is established by nature, that the barbarians, possessing a powerful body and a weak mind, are only capable of physical labor.

The argument of slavery "by nature" is complemented by arguments of an economic order. Slavery, from this point of view, is caused by the needs of housekeeping and production activities. "If the weaving shuttles themselves weaved, and the plectrums themselves played the cithara, then the architects would not need workers, and the masters would not need slaves."

Private property, like slavery, is rooted in nature and is an element of the family. Aristotle was a resolute opponent of the socialization of property proposed by Plato. "It's hard to put into words how much pleasure there is in the consciousness that something belongs to you." He found the community of property, moreover, economically untenable, hindering the development of economic inclinations in a person. "People care most about what belongs to them personally; they care least about what is common."

Aristotle saw the main task of political theory in finding the perfect state system. To this end, he analyzed in detail the existing forms of the state, their shortcomings and the causes of coups d'état.

The classification of the forms of the state in the "Politics" is carried out according to two criteria: according to the number of ruling persons and the goal pursued in the state. Depending on the number of rulers, Aristotle singles out the rule of one, few and majority. According to the second criterion, right states are distinguished, where the supreme power pursues the goals of the common good of citizens, and wrong ones, where rulers are guided by the interests of personal gain. The imposition of these classifications on each other gives six types of government. Regular states include the monarchy, the aristocracy, and the polity; to the wrong ones - tyranny, oligarchy and democracy.

Approximately the same classification, but carried out on other grounds, can be found in Plato's dialogue "Politician". However, if Plato was looking for an ideal device, then Aristotle recommended one of the existing forms as the best. He also tried to reduce the diversity of state forms to two main ones - oligarchy and democracy. Their product or mixture are all other varieties of power.

In an oligarchy, power belongs to the rich, in a democracy, to the poor. Speaking of democracy and oligarchy, Aristotle deviates from the formal criteria for their differentiation and highlights the sign of the property status of those in power. The rich and the poor, the philosopher pointed out, constitute, as it were, two poles, diametrically opposite parts of any state, so that, depending on the preponderance of one side or another, the corresponding form of government is established. The root cause of political instability, revolts and changing forms of the state is the lack of proper equality. Oligarchy exacerbates existing inequalities, while democracy over-equalizes the rich and the common people. In his discussions of democracy and oligarchy, Aristotle comes close to understanding the social contradictions that determined the development of the slave state.

Aristotle's political sympathies are on the side of the polity, a mixed form of the state arising from a combination of oligarchy and democracy.

Economically, the polity is a system in which medium-sized property predominates, which makes it possible not only to guarantee the self-sufficiency of families, but also to weaken the contradictions between wealth and poverty. Aristotle contrasts economics as the ability to properly manage a household with chrematistics, or the art of accumulating for the sake of profit. Aristotle condemns the irrepressible passion for wealth, expanded trade, usury, etc. In addition to limiting the size of property in a perfect state, joint meals and other events are provided to ensure the solidarity of wealthy citizens and the free poor. "It is better that property be private, and the use of it - common," Aristotle argued.

Aristotle, like no other philosopher before him, is concerned with the problem of political perfection, the social ideal. He points out that politics should be concerned with the study of the best form of government and asks questions: what kind of organization is this? What should be its properties? Who is the right kind for? Can all states achieve the political ideal? Answering the last question, Aristotle draws attention to the fact that, in theoretical reasoning, everything can be beautiful, but in practice it is often unrealizable. Here the philosopher shows himself to be a greater pragmatist and realist than his great predecessors - Socrates and Plato. He notes that it is necessary to study not only the best form of government, but also possible under the given circumstances, and the task of improving the social system is no less important and complex. He also comes to an important conclusion: in the state, both citizens and rulers must proceed from the consciousness of the common good.

4. Political thought of the Hellenistic period (second half of the 4th - 2nd century BC)

The crisis of ancient Greek statehood was clearly manifested in the teachings about the state and law of the Hellenistic period. In the last third of the IV century BC. the ancient Greek policies lose their independence and fall first under the rule of Macedonia, and then Rome. The political thought of this time was reflected in the teachings of Epicurus, the Stoics and Polybius.

The teachings of Epicurus are characterized by motives of apoliticality, the preaching of non-participation in public and political life. According to Epicurus, the main goal of state power and the basis of political communication are to ensure the mutual security of people, overcome their mutual fear, and not cause harm to each other. True security is achieved only through a quiet life and removal from the crowd. Within the framework of broad political communication, “security from people is achieved to some extent due to some force that removes disturbing people and welfare”

With such an understanding of the meaning and purpose of political communication, Epicurean interpretation of the state is also connected as the result of an agreement between people about their common benefit - mutual security.

As a staunch individualist, Epicurus was opposed to extreme democracy. He sharply contrasted "the wise man - the crowd." “I,” he noted, “never sought to please the crowd, what they liked, I didn’t learn what I knew, it was far from their feelings.”

Politically, Epicurean ethics is most consistent with a form of moderate democracy, in which the rule of law is combined with the greatest possible measure of freedom and autonomy of individuals.

Adherents of Stoicism, the founder of which was Zeno, had their own ideas about political life. According to the Stoics, the basis of civil society is the natural attraction of people to each other, their natural connection with each other. Consequently, the state acts as a natural association, and not as an artificial, conditional, contractual formation.

Starting from the universal nature of natural law (and, consequently, justice by nature), the Stoics in their writings on the state substantiated cosmopolitan ideas that all people are citizens of a single world state and that man is a citizen of the universe. With their emphasis on the universal significance, universal value and unconditional power of the world state, the Stoics devalued the meaning and role of a separate and special polis form of statehood, polis laws, orders and regulations. Judging by the surviving information, Zeno substantiated the idea of mixed government: "The best state system is a combination of democracy, state power and aristocracy."

The teachings of the Stoics had a noticeable influence on the views of Polybius. His views are reflected in the work "History in forty books" in the center of which is the path of Rome to dominance over the entire Mediterranean. Polybius is characterized by a statist view of current events, according to which one or another state structure has a decisive role in all human relations.

Polybius considers the history of the emergence of statehood and the subsequent change of state forms as a natural process that takes place according to the law of nature. According to Polybius, there are six main forms of state: kingdom, tyranny, aristocracy, oligarchy, democracy, ochlocracy.

He sees the reason for the emergence of the state in the fact that the weakness, natural for all living beings, “encourages them to gather in a homogeneous crowd”, the leader of which is the one who surpasses everyone in bodily strength and spiritual courage. Over time, the leader imperceptibly turns into a king and his power becomes hereditary. When kings change their way of life with its simplicity and concern for their subjects, they begin to indulge in excesses, the reciprocal envy and discontent of their subjects turn the kingdom into tyranny. Polybius characterizes this form of state as the beginning of the decline of power. Further, according to the scheme of Polybius, noble and courageous people, not wanting to endure the arbitrariness of a tyrant, overthrow him and establish an aristocracy.

As the kingdom degenerates into tyranny, so the aristocracy degenerates into an oligarchy, in which lawlessness, money-grubbing, and abuse of power reign. The successful performance of the people against the oligarchs leads to the establishment of democracy. Initially, equality and freedom are valued in a democratic state, but gradually the crowd, accustomed to feeding on handouts, is removed from state affairs and chooses an ambitious and demagogue as its leader. Democracy turns into ochlocracy - the worst form of government, in which the crowd, gathered around the leader, commits excesses, commits murders, until it completely runs wild and again chooses a strong and courageous leader. The circle of change of state forms is closing. Polybius also notes that since each of the forms of government embodies only one principle, the degeneration of each of the forms into its opposite is inevitable. So tyranny accompanies the kingdom, democracy - the unbridled domination of force. Proceeding from this, Polybius concludes that the best form of government will be the one in which the features of royal power, aristocracy and democracy are combined. Polybius sees the main advantage of such a mixed form in ensuring the stability of the state, preventing the transition to perverted forms of government (oligarchy and ochlocracy).

Conclusion

Thus, for the classics of antiquity, the problem of the state-legal structure was an important philosophical problem. Seeing reality in front of them, philosophers understood that there was no ideal government in any of the Greek cities, and dissatisfaction with culture caused them, accordingly, a wave of valuable scientific reflection. Therefore, in their search, they tried to model some kind of ideal state, an ideal form of government, the image of an ideal ruler in it, and the legislation of this perfect state. Of the then existing forms of government, the sympathies of thinkers were either on the side of the aristocracy (Socrates, Aristotle) or the monarchy (Plato). a lot of danger.

The efforts of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle and other researchers in the study of the actual problems of the era were of enduring importance for the philosophy of culture and political philosophy. Ancient thinkers undoubtedly made a huge contribution to the philosophical understanding of political culture in general. In many ways, they were the first researchers who sent a powerful cultural code, the content of which is still being deciphered by modern science.

Bibliography:

1. Political science: textbook / ed. A.A. Radugin. - ed. 2nd, revised. and additional - M.: Center, 2003. - 336 p. (alma mater)

2. History of political and legal doctrines / ed. V.S. Nersesyants.- M.: Infra-M, Norma, 1997. - 727 p.

3. Leist O. History of political and legal doctrines [Electronic resource] // http://www.gumer.info/bibliotek_Buks/Pravo/Leist/_03.php

4. Kozyrev V.V. Prosekova M.N. The Image of the Ideal State in the Philosophy of Ancient Greece [Electronic resource] // http://www.gumer.info/bibliotek_Buks/Pravo/Leist/_03.phphttp://www.jurnal.org/articles/2008/filos6.html

5. World history / ed. G.B. Polyak, A.N. Markova. - ed. 3, revised. and additional - M.: UNITI, 2009.- 887 p. (Cogito ergo sun)

6. Dictionary of antiquity. - M.: Ellis Luck; Progress, 1993 .- 704 p.

7. Trukhina N.N., Smyshlyaev A.L. Reader on the history of Ancient Greece. - M.: Greco-Latin Cabinet Yu.A. Shichalina, 2000. - 377 p.

Introduction

A Brief Political History of Ancient Greece

All these processes were reflected and theoretically comprehended in the political teachings of Ancient Greece.

A Brief Political History of Ancient Greece

All these processes were reflected and theoretically comprehended in the political teachings of Ancient Greece.

Political thought of the early period (IX - VI centuries BC)

The Pythagoreans considered anarchy to be the worst evil, noting that a person by nature cannot do without guidance and proper education.

The heyday of political thought (V - first half of the 4th century BC)

The development of political thought in the 5th century was greatly facilitated by the deepening of the philosophical and social analysis of the problems of society, the state and politics.

Certain ideas about politics were expressed by many ancient thinkers of the 5th-4th centuries BC, but more or less detailed ideas about politics were formulated by sophists. Before them, the ancient worldview was dominated by ideas about the inviolability of the established world order: a person is part of the cosmos and all social relations are a manifestation of cosmic laws. Sophists for the first time openly declared that public life, the world of politics are the work of human hands - "man is the measure of all things." The Sophists emphasized the conventionality of legal norms and state institutions. “Justice is nothing but the benefit of the strong”, “what seems to every state fair and beautiful, that is what it is for it” (Protogoras). “Each government establishes laws that are useful to itself: democracy is democratic, tyranny is tyrannical, and the rest do the same” (Arazimakh).

The political ethics of Socrates was a kind of result of the previous development of ancient Greek political thought and at the same time served as the starting point for its further movement to such heights as the political philosophy of Plato and the political science of Aristotle. The political ideal of Socrates is a state-polis, in which, of course, laws that are just by nature prevail. Persistently preaching the need to comply with city laws, Socrates connects with this the unanimity of citizens, without which, in his opinion, neither the state can stand well, nor the house can be happily managed. Moreover, by "unanimity" he means the devotion and obedience of the members of the policy to the laws, but not the unification of tastes, opinions and views of people. However, Socrates' calls for obedience to the law did not mean that he considered any arbitrary decision and order of the authorities to be a law to be observed. So, when the tyrannical "rule of thirty" was established in Athens, two of these rulers, namely Critias and Charicles, having assumed the functions of legislators, adopted a "law" that forbade "teaching the art of speaking." Referring to this ban, the legislators threatened the philosopher with reprisals for his conversations with young people. But Socrates openly ridiculed the absurdity of the mentioned "law" and was, of course, very far from being able to follow it. Socrates' provisions about the coincidence of the lawful and the just, his praise of the legality and reasonableness of the polis orders meant, rather, the desired ideal state of affairs, rather than the real one. For Socrates, the main virtue of his moral philosophy is knowledge, therefore the main principle in the political and legal sphere for him is formulated as follows: "Those who know should rule." This requirement corresponds to the philosophical ideas of Socrates about the reasonable and just principles of the state and law and is critically addressed by him to all forms of political organization.

In his works "State", "Laws" Plato for the first time formulated a holistic doctrine of the social structure, in which the central place is occupied by ideas about the ideal state.

His expression "man is a political animal", that is, related to the city-state - the policy, became popular. Therefore, we can say that for Aristotle, a person is by nature a state being, therefore, politics is primarily a sphere of state relations, and a person is a citizen by his very nature.

Aristotle's political sympathies are on the side of the polity, a mixed form of the state arising from a combination of oligarchy and democracy.

Aristotle, like no other philosopher before him, is concerned with the problem of political perfection, the social ideal. He points out that politics should be concerned with the study of the best form of government and asks questions: what kind of organization is this? What should be its properties? Who is the right kind for? Can all states achieve the political ideal? Answering the last question, Aristotle draws attention to the fact that, in theoretical reasoning, everything can be beautiful, but in practice it is often unrealizable. Here the philosopher shows himself to be a greater pragmatist and realist than his great predecessors, Socrates and Plato. He notes that it is necessary to study not only the best form of government, but also possible under the given circumstances, and the task of improving the social system is no less important and complex. He also comes to an important conclusion: in the state, both citizens and rulers must proceed from the consciousness of the common good.

Political thought of the Hellenistic period (second half of the 4th - 2nd century BC)

As a staunch individualist, Epicurus was opposed to extreme democracy. He sharply contrasted "the wise man - the crowd." “I,” he noted, “never sought to please the crowd, what they liked, that I did not learn, what I knew, it was far from their feelings.”

Politically, Epicurean ethics is most consistent with a form of moderate democracy, in which the rule of law is combined with the greatest possible measure of freedom and autonomy of individuals.

Starting from the universal nature of natural law (and, therefore, justice by nature), the Stoics in their writings on the state substantiated the cosmopolitan ideas that all people are citizens of a single world state and that man is a citizen of the universe. With their emphasis on the universal significance, universal value and unconditional power of the world state, the Stoics devalued the meaning and role of a separate and special polis form of statehood, polis laws, orders and regulations. Judging by the surviving information, Zeno substantiated the idea of mixed government: "The best state system is the combination of democracy, state power and aristocracy."

As the kingdom degenerates into tyranny, so the aristocracy degenerates into an oligarchy, in which lawlessness, money-grubbing, and abuse of power reign. The successful performance of the people against the oligarchs leads to the establishment of democracy. Initially, equality and freedom are valued in a democratic state, but gradually the crowd, accustomed to feeding on handouts, is removed from state affairs and chooses an ambitious and demagogue as its leader. Democracy turns into ochlocracy - the worst form of government, in which the crowd, gathered around the leader, commits excesses, commits murders, until it completely runs wild and again chooses a strong and courageous leader. The circle of change of state forms is closing. Polybius also notes that since each of the forms of government embodies only one principle, the degeneration of each of the forms into its opposite is inevitable. Thus tyranny accompanies the kingdom, and the unbridled domination of force accompanies democracy. Proceeding from this, Polybius concludes that the best form of government will be the one in which the features of royal power, aristocracy and democracy are combined. Polybius sees the main advantage of such a mixed form in ensuring the stability of the state, preventing the transition to perverted forms of government (oligarchy and ochlocracy).

What else to read

What does "wear a hat on a butch" mean? In domestic places not so remote, all prisoners are divided into four prison castes (they are also called ...

How and how much you can drink coffee from chicory If doctors categorically forbid you to drink coffee, then do not despair! Chicory will be an excellent substitute for your favorite ...

What foods promote serotonin synthesis? We have all heard of the miraculous hormone of happiness. It is found in chocolate and bananas, after which the mood ...

Political doctrines of ancient Greece.

Similar Documents

Introduction

A Brief Political History of Ancient Greece

What else to read

THE LAST NOTES

Political doctrines of ancient Greece.

Similar Documents

Introduction

A Brief Political History of Ancient Greece

What else to read

THE LAST NOTES

Categories