How Does Aristotle Justify Slavery?

Slavery dates back to the seventeenth century, when they were brought by ship from Africa to America. Plantation owners has indentured servants from Europe, who was serving time for their actions, and slaves from Africa. There was a prevalent development of degrading treatment towards African slaves and the institution of slavery as a whole in the time period of 1607- 1750 in Virginia which can be seen by slaves getting taken advantage of, children being taken away or runaway ads and also not receiving the same basic human rights as other individuals .

Roman slavery must be approached as a social institution in which the economic aspect, though important, was subsidiary, in order to appreciate the vast degree of significance which Romans themselves attributed to the presence of slavery among them, as well as its distinct cultural impact (Bradley 1998, p.18). The large presence of slaves and renewable population of skilled freedmen allowed the Roman Empire to achieve the economic and infrastructural achievements for which they are remembered, the degree of their contributions rendering Roman Italy, a ‘slave society.’ It has been estimated that, during the reign of Augustus, the servile population of Italy could have been as high as thirty-five percent (1998, pp.12-13). This high reliance on and large population of slaves was reflected throughout the empire, rendering society one in which the status of individuals - free, freedman or slave, was exceedingly salient and consequential. The strict societal hierarchy of the Roman Empire was built upon and directly contributed to the deep social divides between classes which defined social experience in the Roman Empire. Manumission, increased presence of freedmen and substantial base of slave population factored strongly into the increased significance levied upon social status, division between social groups and definition of position in society.

The English colonies in present day America used slavery as a form a cheap labor, but it wasn't until the seventeenth century that the view of slavery became racial based. Slave labor on Chesapeake was thought as beneficial because slaves never became free and their children were born into slavery.“Species in which a distinction is already marked immediately at birth, between those of it members who are intended for being ruled and those who are intended to rule.” Many poor farmers that lived on Chesapeake felt that they were intended to rule because they could get married and have families, property, move and associate with other people, be a jury, vote and hold office. “They could also work and sleep as they pleased.” When the English started expanding and looking for land one of their rationales was that they could put the land to better use by employing European-style agriculture and livestock. Many of the English policies towards the Indians were based on segregation. In order to continue segregation, the English came to develop the notion of “race”: they began to view race as an imperative that justified English rule. “Greeks regarded themselves as well born into their own country but absolutely and in all places.” The English thought of themselves the same way. Aristotle’s views were present in the English justification for supporting that slavery and the taking of lawns justified and therefore it was natural because they were

In Athens, people became slaves through captivity on occasion, but most commonly through blood line. For instance, if a slave gives birth, that child will then, also, become a slave. William Westermann describes the ownership of slavery in Athens as being owned by families and individuals, not by the city-state as a whole. People in Sparta on the other hand became slaves primarily through being captured following battle. Spartan slaves, also known as helots, were, in contrast to Athenian slaves, held captive by

Slavery can be dated back to very early civilizations and were crucial in everyday activities, also to the economy. Some of these ancient civilizations include the India, Mesopotamian and Chinese and these had slaves work in their homes or their shops. Another early civilization who used slaves were the Egyptian who used the slaves to build their monuments, castles, palaces and statues. Hebrews also used slaves but were a little more moral on how they were identified. The Aztec, Inca and Mayan used slaves in many forms and most of these slaves were optained through war prisoners and were used in agriculture and warfare.

In "Justifying Slavery," Aristotle, "who was well aware of moral issues," (p. 53). does not suggest in his writing that he recognizes slavery as immoral. Seneca, however, in "On

Slavery has been around for a very long time. However, it is not always how it seems or put out to be. Like the Barbarians, a Greek slave, for example. Their inability to speak Greek indicated their slave status because it kept them from talking back to their masters. This has lead the Greeks to consider otherness a characteristic of slaves. And in the 18th century, slave trade is just another trade for merchants and people involved, like the fact Europeans actually obtained African slaves by trading for them in exchange for goods; usually like guns or metal tools; and for those Africans, slaves were a form of property and a very valuable one.

When you look at the word slavery most have this fixed characterization of the word and refer back to when Europeans enslaved Africans. If we look in ancient Greece times we see slavery was around for years. Not only do we see that slavery has been around for year we also see that there were many different uses of slavery and the meaning of slavery. For instances, the Greeks used slavery as reasoning for their actions. Also, people such as the Athenians used slavery as a word to describe people as someone who needed to be ruled. Greeks looked down upon other Greeks being used as slaves, when they were not enslaving them. During these ancient times, many tyrants had many slaves but these tyrants were very relatable to their subjects.

How did Romans view slavery and did they think of it as something wrong to do? Romans saw slavery as a necessity and so they did not see slavery as a bad act or something wrong to own. They just thought of it more as just a part of life where some were slaves and some were just born into wealthy families or families that were high up on the pyramid. They did not give slaves any rights so that owners would not think of them as people or equals. How did

This paper examines Locke`s stand on the state of nature, the state of war, and his reasoning behind the justification of slavery. I am here to prove that Locke`s position on slavery was intended to relieve absolute power from the monarchy, and transfer more of the power into the wealthy and educated people of his own social economic background. In order to accomplish this task, the rest of the essay unfolds in three parts: Part One states and explains Locke`s argument, Part Two applies counter examples to see if Locke`s statement holds true under pressure, and Part Three concludes rather Locke`s justification of slavery had biased intentions in transferring power from the kings to the wealthy.

The views of John Locke on the topic of slavery vary drastically from the actual events that took place in the United States. The experiences of Fredrick Douglas give truth to this statement. In Locke 's Second Treatise of Government, he expresses the freedom that all men should have as long as they abide by the common rule of the society. In actuality, slaves may have done nothing wrong, but their freedom was still taken away from them. John Locke believed slavery should be a form of punishment for those who committed a crime worthy of death and anyone who committed such a crime should become a slave. Fredrick Douglas teaches us that what really took place in the United States was an unfair practice of kidnapping, then buying and

“The fact is, that civilization requires slaves. The Greeks were quite right there. Unless there are slaves to do the ugly, horrible, uninteresting work, culture and contemplation become almost impossible.” - OSCAR WILDE, The Soul of Man Under Socialism

There were a number of Roman laws regarding slavery, and these too, changed over time. In the Republican period, slaves had no rights and were always subject to the whims of their owners. They did have some legal standing, however. They were allowed to act as witnesses in trials, and could gain freedom either through their owner's gratitude after loyal service or by buying it through the meager earnings they might collect over a lifetime of service. For example, owners in the Republic had the right to kill or mutilate slaves at a whim, but later imperial laws took this right away, though in practice this law could be largely ignored. This represents how valued slaves were to the Roman people.

Even though the slavery was introduced in the early 1600s, it had no doubt that the abolitionist inaugurated the movements about the slavery actively from early 1850s. The slavery became the essential part of industry in the South more than in the North because of the large plantations and slave trades. So in the Southerners’ perspective, the slave flourished the businesses with their inexpensive labor forces in order to profit; they argued slaves were by and large a culturally inferior, child-like people who were treated well by whites and thus content with their status in life. However, Uncle Tom’s Cabin described the slavery as an evil institution that must be abolished accurately from the historians today.

Thomas Aquinas is well acquitted with Aristotle’s views on slavery. In that so, in order to understand St. Thomas Aquinas views on slavery, it is essential to comprehend the perspective and works of Aristotle that he gave. Aristotle’s works on slavery showed up in the Politics and in the Nichomachean Ethics, thus majority of his statements on slavery can be found, in