WritingAssignemnt_Dube2

.pdf

School

Indian River State College *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

102

Subject

Political Science

Date

Jan 9, 2024

Type

pdf

Pages

Uploaded by joeldube15

Joel Dube IS-201-02 Intro to International Studies Professor Hierman 9/20/2021 Help Received: This cadet used Grammarly and Easybib to check grammar and cite sources. This cadet also referenced other cadets to determine how to properly structure an answer to the questions and format this cadet's paper. Reference Works Cited page Writing Assignment 1 1. Briefly summarize Aristotle's conception of politics and political organization. Aristotle's definition of the state revolves around the idea that man naturally acts with the objective of achieving something good. What Aristotle refers to as a polis is in its most basic form a species of association, and according to Aristotle, all associations are purposed with the goal of attaining some good (Aristotle 107). These states are considered by Aristotle to be sovereign and inclusive associations, providing man with the opportunity to achieve their full potential (Amadio and Kenny 2021). Aristotle believes that justice and law belong to the state, and that man, by nature, is an animal intended to live in the state governed by its rules. Within this perspective, Aristotle holds that it is possible to be a good citizen and a bad man. To be considered a good citizen, one must discharge well the functions belonging to him. Man is intended to share in the benefits of the polis, and those who do not share in those benefits because they are already self-sufficient, are not part of the polis (Aristotle 110).

The structure of government in the state is defined by Aristotle as either needing to be in the hands of one, the few, or the many (Amadio and Kenny 2021). A government under a singular ruler for the benefit of all is considered a monarchy, whereas a government under a singular ruler for his sole benefit is considered by Aristotle to be a tyranny. Government ruled by the few is an aristocracy if aimed at benefiting the interests of the state, and an obligatory if aimed at only benefiting the few in power. A government that is ruled by the majority is referred to by Aristotle as a polity (Amadio and Kenny 2021). Of these forms of government, Aristotle references that “constitutional democracy” is the best ruling form in a polis, where the rich and poor equally respect each other's rights and where qualified citizens rule with the consent of all (Amadio and Kenny 2021). 2. Briefly summarize Weber's conception of politics and political organization. According to Weber, every state is founded on force (Weber 1). If social institutions were to cease to use force, then the concept of the state would be terminated, and anarchy would rise in its wake. In his 1919 Lecture, “Politics as a Vocation,” Max Weber defines the state as a human community that successfully claimed the monopoly over the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory (Munro 2013). This does not necessarily mean that the state is the only actor that uses force, but that the state is the only actor that can legitimately use force. To Weber, the state, in its simplest form, is man dominating man, a relationship which was supported by the means of legitimate violence (Munro 2013). Emerging as a leader, in Weber’s definition of the state, is possible through either traditional dominance, gift of grace, or validity through rational legal authority. In traditional

dominance, the legitimacy of authority comes from tradition (Weber 2). When referencing the gift of grace, Weber states that authority comes from charisma, personality, and the natural leadership qualities of the individual (Weber 2). Finally, rational legal authority is legitimized, according to Weber, through democracy and the people (Weber 2). According to Weber, politics is the broad concept of independent leadership, as well as a means of sharing power either among other states or groups within the state. Politicians, within Weber’s definition of the state, must balance ethic of moral conviction with an ethic of responsibility. Moral conviction references the unshakable beliefs that a politician must hold, whereas an ethic of responsibility is the day-to-day need for politicians to use the state’s violence in a fashion that works for the greater good of peace (Munro 2013). 3. What are the similarities between the conceptualizations of the two authors? What are the differences? When comparing and contrasting Aristotle’s and Weber’s views on politics and political association, one would need to consider how each author conceptualizes the state. Both consider the state to be the cumulation of people organized for a purpose. These states are also considered to be sovereign and to hold the power to determine what is lawful as well as how to administer justice. In both cases, Aristotle and Weber consider a good citizen to be those individuals who contribute and fully engage in the state, completing their functions within the state to the best of their abilities. Both authors would also find common ground in the statement that every state is not ruled in an analogous way. Both Aristotle and Weber provide numerous methods for which a state may establish authority as well as how that authority is determined.

However, Aristotle and Weber would disagree on the means by which a state is created. Weber holds that the state is legitimized through its monopoly over the legal use of physical force. Aristotle would contrast this belief, claiming that a state is a cumulation of humans in the pursuit of good. Another contrasting belief between the two authors is the definition of politics itself. Aristotle holds firm to the opinion that politics is the interactions between people to go somewhere or to do something productive with the goal of creating good. Weber on the other hand argues that politics is the broad concept of independent leadership with the purpose of either sharing power among other states or groups within a state. In both respective readings, Aristotle and Weber may also dispute what people use politics for. Weber defended the stance that in politics, one is either living for or living off politics, whereas Aristotle would argue that those involved in politics are doing so because they are naturally drawn to political associations in order to satisfy their social needs (Weber 5). 4. Which is more useful for understanding contemporary political dynamics in Mexico (Tancitaro, in particular)? Why? Aristotle would likely look at the peculiar case study of contemporary political dynamics in Mexico through a refined lens. He would first look to identify a legitimate authority or polis, which according to his definition of a state, is the congregation of humans with a driving pursuit for good. For instance, when the city known as Tancitaro was overtaken by the people within its borders, it was done with the purpose of expelling the Mexican cartel and replacing them with, what the people considered to be, a complacent government. Aristotle would argue that this secession of state was done so for the purpose of good, and that the new state now ruled by

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help