Philosophy of Society

Political Philosophy (Theory of the State)

The State and the Good Nature of Man

The first question that arose within political philosophy is the problem of the origin of the state. Philosophers have sought to answer why and for what purpose the state came into existence: whether it is natural to man or contrary to human nature, and which aspects of human nature necessitated the state's emergence. Throughout the history of political philosophy, various answers have been proposed. One of the most ancient explanations for the foundation of the state is the belief that it stems from the good nature of man. According to these theories, the state is the natural environment for human existence, necessary for the realization of man's good inclinations and talents.

The most influential school of Chinese philosophy, which laid the foundational direction for the development of Chinese culture, was Confucianism. Like all schools of Chinese thought, Confucians sought to answer what must be done for all to live happily. Confucius believed that a happy society would arise when everyone adhered to tradition. During the reign of the Western Zhou dynasty, China was strong, and its citizens were happy. To return to that ideal state, the customs of that time must be observed. Thus, Confucius sanctified China's past, elevating it to the status of a model for all future eras. The philosophers who developed Confucianism after Confucius fully agreed with their teacher on the value of tradition and customs, but they paid special attention to the role of the state in this process. At this stage, Confucian thinkers diverged in their views. Early Confucianism is represented by three great names: Mencius, Xunzi, and Dong Zhongshu. Mencius believed that man is good by nature, but goodness is embedded in human nature as implicit potential. To actualize this potential, people must be educated and guided. The task of education is not to instill foreign traits in people but to cultivate those inherent from birth. If education is necessary, then there must exist an institution capable of fulfilling this task. This institution is the state. Thus, Mencius believed that the state is essential for the realization of man's good nature. Other Confucians held different views. Xunzi, for example, argued that man is evil by nature, and therefore must be educated and taught to adopt good customs, which are alien to human nature. Like Mencius, Xunzi saw this as the state's duty. Dong Zhongshu proposed that man possesses both good and evil tendencies, and the state's role is to cultivate the good in people. Since Mencius's position triumphed in the debates among Confucians, his interpretation of the state became the orthodox view, and during the Han dynasty, Mencius's Confucianism became the official ideology of China.

In Ancient Greece, Plato developed a significant theory of the state, grounded in his anthropology. Plato held that the human soul consists of three parts: the rational, which should govern life; the passionate, which incites irrational actions and must be restrained within clear limits; and the spirited, which carries out the decisions of the first two. Since the state mirrors the individual, everything found in the individual must also be present in the state. If the soul has three parts, the state must have three classes. The rational part of the soul corresponds to the educated elite, who should govern the country—Plato called this class the philosopher-kings. The passionate part corresponds to those who accumulate material goods, such as artisans and peasants. The spirited part aligns with the warriors, whose task is to defend the state. Plato believed that the state would be effective if each class performed its assigned role and did not overstep into others' duties: intellectuals should govern, artisans and peasants should work, and warriors should protect. The state, being a projection of the human soul, is thus a reflection of human nature. Human nature is good, and therefore the state, too, is good. It is needed to enable people to realize their good potential.

A person is happy when their soul is harmonious and orderly. For Plato, the same must be true of the state. To ensure that rulers govern wisely and warriors defend effectively, they must not have personal financial interests, and thus should not possess private property. Artisans and peasants, on the other hand, will not work well if they do not profit from their labor, so private property must be preserved for them. Repeating the teachings of his mentor Socrates, Plato held that to realize their good potential, people need external assistance. The state, therefore, in Plato's philosophy, is the institution responsible for ensuring the development of man's good qualities.

Plato became so absorbed in contemplating the state's educational role that his concept of the state turned into a totalitarian entity that permeated every aspect of human life. He believed that since the state is governed by intellectuals, who, through their education, better distinguish good from bad, they should decide everything to secure the best conditions for life: what to read, what to eat, what to drink, what music to listen to, what to wear, whom to marry, how much to sleep, and how much to work. This level of state control, coupled with the absence of private property, turned Plato into an ideologue of dictatorship. However, his vision was rooted in a sincere desire to build a state where everyone could be happy. To achieve this, people needed help in realizing the good potential of their nature—a task that, according to Plato, the state must fulfill.

Aristotle, a disciple of Plato, also believed that the state is a natural environment essential for the realization of human potential. In his view, man is by nature both rational and social. The inclination to live within society is embedded in human essence, manifesting at the level of instinct. Therefore, society is as necessary for humanity as air, water, and food. Without society, man cannot fulfill his potential nor fully become human. The human drive to live within a society is realized on several levels, with the family being the most basic. Aristotle considered the ideal family to be monogamous, with a small number of children (up to three). The state represents the higher level of social life and is necessary for people to cultivate their virtuous dispositions.

Aristotle rejected Plato’s concept of an ideal state. Whereas Plato sought to describe a state that would be perfect for its citizens, Aristotle argued that there is no point in analyzing what cannot be achieved. He turned his attention to the actual state. A key criterion for a good state, according to Aristotle, is the property of its citizens. He believed that private ownership is natural and necessary for citizens. Without property, people cannot preserve their freedom or build an effective state. By the criterion of property, the population of any state is divided into the rich, the middle class, and the poor. The form of government depends on which of these groups dominates. In the realm of ethics, Aristotle asserted that the moral ideal is the "golden mean," and that any extremity is sinful. He applied this principle to politics, claiming that the best state is one where the middle class prevails. If the rich, who are always few, dominate, the state turns into an oligarchy. If the poor, whose poverty prevents them from making free and responsible decisions, dominate, the state becomes an ochlocracy. But when the middle class holds power, the citizens can make balanced decisions, and the state will be at its best.

If the state is a natural institution, its structure must also correspond to human nature. The state should consist of rulers, warriors, and workers. Not everyone can do everything, and thus not everyone can be equal. For this reason, Aristotle rejected the idea of absolute equality among citizens. The state must be based on reason, meaning that all citizens should use their common sense. However, some people, while possessing the strength to work, lack the intellect to think critically. Since they cannot use their own reason, they must be slaves, subject to the reason of their masters. If slaves work and do not meddle in politics, economics, or military affairs, they will be happy in the condition natural to them. After all, it is better for slaves to obey their masters and have all they need for a happy life than to take control of their own lives and, lacking the necessary attributes, ruin them.

Plato and Aristotle established two methods of studying political reality. Plato was concerned with how the state ought to be, while Aristotle focused on how it is. These two themes— the ideal state and the actual state—remain central to political discourse. Aristotle emphasized the importance of the middle class. In the 19th and 20th centuries, scholars once again became interested in the middle class, recognizing it as the foundation of democracy and political progress. Plato and Aristotle also made the first classification of forms of government, defined by two key criteria: the moral quality of those in power (good or evil) and the number of rulers (one, a few, or many).

• Monarchy is the rule of one good ruler. This is the best form of government, for a good ruler will strive to govern well, and with power concentrated in his hands, no one can prevent him from doing good.
• Aristocracy (rule of the best) is the government of a few good individuals. This form of government is good because the rulers are virtuous, but it is less efficient than monarchy because aristocrats must make decisions collectively, which requires time and effort. Plato believed that while monarchy is the best form of government, aristocracy is the most feasible, as establishing monarchy in the Greek city-states was impossible.
• Polity or democracy (rule of the people) is the government where power is held by the people, who are virtuous. Plato regarded democracy as good but inefficient, while Aristotle considered it the best form of government, as it provides governing opportunities to the majority.
• Ochlocracy (mob rule) is when the masses govern. Any people can turn into a mob when their education, values, and morals fall to a low level. The people seek high culture, while the mob craves bread and circuses. The mob always brings evil, devastation, and degeneration. Since in ochlocracy power is held by the wicked, it is an evil form of government.
• Oligarchy (rule of the few) is when a few wicked individuals govern. This form of government is worse than ochlocracy because nothing stands in the way of oligarchs committing evil.
• Tyranny is the rule of one wicked tyrant.

Medieval political philosophy was shaped by two great thinkers: Saint Augustine and Thomas Aquinas. Augustine saw the state as a necessary evil to curb the consequences of sin, while Thomas Aquinas (1226-1274), influenced by Aristotle, argued that the state is part of God’s design. God created humans as social beings and thus laid the foundation for the state. Since someone must govern in the state, power must come from God. If God had not established the state, the world would fall into chaos. Since authority is established by God, rulers must follow God's law. If a ruler does not abide by God's law, they are illegitimate, and the people have the right to overthrow them.

The discussion about human nature and the foundations of the state flared up again after the Reformation. The bloody wars caused by the Reformation led many to doubt the goodness of human nature. The English philosopher Thomas Hobbes declared that humans are, in fact, selfish, and that the state exists not to help people realize their nature but to restrain their egoism. During the Enlightenment, one of the greatest thinkers in English philosophy, John Locke (1632-1704), set the direction for political philosophy. Locke believed that people are naturally good. In the past, humans lived freely, exercising their liberty and property without conflict. But the desire to preserve freedom and property led people to form an institution that would protect them from risks. Thus, the state arose as a result of a social contract, an agreement by people to live together and adhere to shared rules. The guarantee of these rules within the state is the monarch. Locke was a proponent of constitutional monarchy, in which the king’s power is limited. The monarch should not interfere in the lives of the people but should protect them from external threats, punish criminals, and limit opportunities for wrongdoing, while also abiding by the laws themselves.