Polis 34 (1):115-135 (
2017)
Copy
BIBTEX
Abstract
This paper argues that Aristotle challenges the view of Athenian democrats that all rule
is master rule – the imposition of the will of the powerful on the powerless – by arguing
that the politeuma, or government, should be identical with the politeia, understood
both as the constitution and the collectivity of citizens. I examine Aristotle’s analysis
and response to democrats’ skepticism of the law that the constitution embodies.
Aristotle argues that democrats think law limits license even when the source of law is
the people themselves. The view of citizens as the source of law coupled with the view
of the law as a commitment to collective determinations regarding the end makes law
salvation rather than slavery.