What is Politics?
Academics and social scientist have yet to formulate a clear and easy to understand definition for politics. Although many have written extensive on the subject, many of the definitions we have today are broad and complex. Aristotle is one of the earliest to reach groundbreaking conclusions in the topic. When he described man as a political animal, he meant exactly what he wrote. Although he saw major similarities between humans and other animals, he identified pivotal differences that set humans apart from the others; language and deliberation are two of them. De Waal writing thousands of years after Aristotle, Draws on many of Aristotle’s ideas. The origin of politics is one topic that the two authors, though separated by time, seem to have a common understanding on. De Waal like Aristotle notes that politics predates men, thus suggesting that man did not invent politics. De Waal confirms this in his observation of Chimpanzee communities. Hannah Arendt also draws on Aristotle’s understanding of association, speech and communication to formulate what she defined as the three most fundamental human activities: labor work and action.
“Politics arises between men, and so quite outside of man” (Arendt, Introduction Into Politics 95). Politics come from the relations between men, thus man is incapable of action since action comes from interaction amongst men. Action is a synonym of speech, “for speech is what makes man a political being” (Arendt, The Human Condition 3). Although Arendt’s writes extensively about the other two fundamental human activities: labor and work, it is action that seems to be more relevant. However, it is ironic that Arendt believes action, which is one of the fundamental human activities is missing from today’s societies. Thus Arendt suggests that without speech we are no longer political, “for speech is what makes man a political being” (Arendt, The Human Condition 3). Hannah Arendt suggests the reason for this is the emergence of the social and merging of the once separate public and private realm. While still visible in the ancient Greek City-States, the emergence of modern nation state merged the two “separate entities” (Arendt, The Human Condition 28). Although Arendt develops important theories on the topic of politics, however her ideas at the same time affirm that men are no longer capable of action thus suggesting we are no longer political beings. Still her understandings of human interaction and speech capability are pivotal points on the definition of politics.
Arendt’s idea that politics comes from the interaction amongst men didn’t start with her. In fact thousands of year before, Aristotle played with the idea that politics comes from the human association. Aristotle notes that every community has “some one common object in view” (History of Animals 1). Though an important part of human politics, Aristotle may have realized this from an unexpected society: that of the bees. The goal of this comparison is to show that politics predates humans, thus bringing more meaning to Aristotle’s suggestions of politics be older than men. But what sets us apart from the other creatures, is our ability to speak, reason and our ability to “declare what is just and what is unjust”, distinguish good from evil (Aristotle, Politics 7). Aristotle affirms “man is furnished from birth with arms such as language” (Aristotle, Politics 7). Even though Language should be used for the “moral prudence and virtue”, Aristotle acknowledges the potential it has to achieve opposite goals (Aristotle, Politics 7). Aristotle’s findings suggest, “the polis exists by nature and that is prior to the individual”; also that man “by nature are part of a political whole” (Aristotle, Politics 6-7).
Aristotle may just be the one to contribute the greatest to the subject. Those who touch on the subject often reference his work. Besides Hannah Arendt, Frans De Waal is another academic whose work I believe contributed significantly to the formulation of a better understanding of politics. Like Arendt, De Waal draws significantly on Aristotle’s ideas. In fact, De Waal goes into details on the theory of politics predating humans. “When Aristotle referred to man as a political animal he could not know just how near the mark he was. Our political activity seems to be a part of an evolutionary heritage we share with our close relatives...the roots of politics are older than humanity” (De Waal, Chimpanzee Politics 207). De Waal gained great insight during his observation of many groups of chimpanzees. He realized that chimps like men, appear to be “intelligent manipulators in their use of others as social instrument” (De Waal, Chimpanzee Politics 206). This is also true in the society of men; “men try to obtain influential position through “social manipulations” (De Waal, Chimpanzee Politics 208). Thus, through his observation, De Waal seemed to agree with Lasswell and point that politics is the “social manipulation to secure and maintain influential positions” (De Waal, Chimpanzee Politics 208). “who gets what, when and how” (Lasswell).
The one thing that puts men apart from other animals is language, our ability to reason and distinguish right from wrong. Our ability to communicate and create relationships amongst each other is one of the great aspects of our society. Fred Schaffer expressed his understandings that the term politics has many different definitions. He uses the definitions of Aristotle, Arendt and Lasswell. His use of these different definitions is evidence that suggest although different, the definitions are right in their own concept. For instance, Arendt thinks, “Politics arises between men, and so quite outside of man” (Arendt, Introduction Into Politics 95); and her definition is different from Lasswell’s idea that politics is all about “who gets what, when and how” (Lasswell).
Since the birth of civilization, men have been trying to define terms such as society, politics and even the origin of it all. Politics is one of the terms that still have no consensus on a definition. For over thousands of years academics have tried to put their own spin to the term politics. From Aristotle to Fred Schaffer; all these political theorists have shown that politics maybe too broad of a term to be defined. Over the years there has been a de facto realization that certain definitions are better than others. Aristotle writing thousands of years ago noticed similarities in human and animal communities; which lead him to suggest that politics predates man. However, language, deliberation and our ability to distinguish right from wrong set us apart from the other animals. Arendt writing thousands of years later reaffirmed Aristotle’s idea that politics arises from the society, but her idea that “speech is what makes man a political being” differs from Aristotle’s view that politics predates man (Arendt, The Human Condition 3). De Waal also understands association to be the pivotal aspect of politics, and agrees with Aristotle’s idea that politics pre dates man. De Waal expands it further in his comparison of chimps and man to introduce Lasswell’s definition of politics, meaning that politics is all about “who gets what, when and how” (lasswell). However great may their differences be, these authors have shown that politics at the most basic involves some sort of association, a community and that politics only arise from interaction in the community.
Academics and social scientist have yet to formulate a clear and easy to understand definition for politics. Although many have written extensive on the subject, many of the definitions we have today are broad and complex. Aristotle is one of the earliest to reach groundbreaking conclusions in the topic. When he described man as a political animal, he meant exactly what he wrote. Although he saw major similarities between humans and other animals, he identified pivotal differences that set humans apart from the others; language and deliberation are two of them. De Waal writing thousands of years after Aristotle, Draws on many of Aristotle’s ideas. The origin of politics is one topic that the two authors, though separated by time, seem to have a common understanding on. De Waal like Aristotle notes that politics predates men, thus suggesting that man did not invent politics. De Waal confirms this in his observation of Chimpanzee communities. Hannah Arendt also draws on Aristotle’s understanding of association, speech and communication to formulate what she defined as the three most fundamental human activities: labor work and action.
“Politics arises between men, and so quite outside of man” (Arendt, Introduction Into Politics 95). Politics come from the relations between men, thus man is incapable of action since action comes from interaction amongst men. Action is a synonym of speech, “for speech is what makes man a political being” (Arendt, The Human Condition 3). Although Arendt’s writes extensively about the other two fundamental human activities: labor and work, it is action that seems to be more relevant. However, it is ironic that Arendt believes action, which is one of the fundamental human activities is missing from today’s societies. Thus Arendt suggests that without speech we are no longer political, “for speech is what makes man a political being” (Arendt, The Human Condition 3). Hannah Arendt suggests the reason for this is the emergence of the social and merging of the once separate public and private realm. While still visible in the ancient Greek City-States, the emergence of modern nation state merged the two “separate entities” (Arendt, The Human Condition 28). Although Arendt develops important theories on the topic of politics, however her ideas at the same time affirm that men are no longer capable of action thus suggesting we are no longer political beings. Still her understandings of human interaction and speech capability are pivotal points on the definition of politics.
Arendt’s idea that politics comes from the interaction amongst men didn’t start with her. In fact thousands of year before, Aristotle played with the idea that politics comes from the human association. Aristotle notes that every community has “some one common object in view” (History of Animals 1). Though an important part of human politics, Aristotle may have realized this from an unexpected society: that of the bees. The goal of this comparison is to show that politics predates humans, thus bringing more meaning to Aristotle’s suggestions of politics be older than men. But what sets us apart from the other creatures, is our ability to speak, reason and our ability to “declare what is just and what is unjust”, distinguish good from evil (Aristotle, Politics 7). Aristotle affirms “man is furnished from birth with arms such as language” (Aristotle, Politics 7). Even though Language should be used for the “moral prudence and virtue”, Aristotle acknowledges the potential it has to achieve opposite goals (Aristotle, Politics 7). Aristotle’s findings suggest, “the polis exists by nature and that is prior to the individual”; also that man “by nature are part of a political whole” (Aristotle, Politics 6-7).
Aristotle may just be the one to contribute the greatest to the subject. Those who touch on the subject often reference his work. Besides Hannah Arendt, Frans De Waal is another academic whose work I believe contributed significantly to the formulation of a better understanding of politics. Like Arendt, De Waal draws significantly on Aristotle’s ideas. In fact, De Waal goes into details on the theory of politics predating humans. “When Aristotle referred to man as a political animal he could not know just how near the mark he was. Our political activity seems to be a part of an evolutionary heritage we share with our close relatives...the roots of politics are older than humanity” (De Waal, Chimpanzee Politics 207). De Waal gained great insight during his observation of many groups of chimpanzees. He realized that chimps like men, appear to be “intelligent manipulators in their use of others as social instrument” (De Waal, Chimpanzee Politics 206). This is also true in the society of men; “men try to obtain influential position through “social manipulations” (De Waal, Chimpanzee Politics 208). Thus, through his observation, De Waal seemed to agree with Lasswell and point that politics is the “social manipulation to secure and maintain influential positions” (De Waal, Chimpanzee Politics 208). “who gets what, when and how” (Lasswell).
The one thing that puts men apart from other animals is language, our ability to reason and distinguish right from wrong. Our ability to communicate and create relationships amongst each other is one of the great aspects of our society. Fred Schaffer expressed his understandings that the term politics has many different definitions. He uses the definitions of Aristotle, Arendt and Lasswell. His use of these different definitions is evidence that suggest although different, the definitions are right in their own concept. For instance, Arendt thinks, “Politics arises between men, and so quite outside of man” (Arendt, Introduction Into Politics 95); and her definition is different from Lasswell’s idea that politics is all about “who gets what, when and how” (Lasswell).
Since the birth of civilization, men have been trying to define terms such as society, politics and even the origin of it all. Politics is one of the terms that still have no consensus on a definition. For over thousands of years academics have tried to put their own spin to the term politics. From Aristotle to Fred Schaffer; all these political theorists have shown that politics maybe too broad of a term to be defined. Over the years there has been a de facto realization that certain definitions are better than others. Aristotle writing thousands of years ago noticed similarities in human and animal communities; which lead him to suggest that politics predates man. However, language, deliberation and our ability to distinguish right from wrong set us apart from the other animals. Arendt writing thousands of years later reaffirmed Aristotle’s idea that politics arises from the society, but her idea that “speech is what makes man a political being” differs from Aristotle’s view that politics predates man (Arendt, The Human Condition 3). De Waal also understands association to be the pivotal aspect of politics, and agrees with Aristotle’s idea that politics pre dates man. De Waal expands it further in his comparison of chimps and man to introduce Lasswell’s definition of politics, meaning that politics is all about “who gets what, when and how” (lasswell). However great may their differences be, these authors have shown that politics at the most basic involves some sort of association, a community and that politics only arise from interaction in the community.
No comments:
Post a Comment