Aristotle’s Justification of Natural Slavery
Aristotle says that the state is made up of households which consist of freemen and slaves, husbands and wives and their children. He finds slavery essential to a household and defends it as natural and, therefore, moral.
According to Aristotle, a slave was a living possession and instrument of action in the hands of his master. A slave, being a living creature like any other servant, is a tool worth many tools. The slave is a tool with life in it. The tool is lifeless slave.
Slavery was rampant in Aristotle’s own time and regarded it as part and parcel of national socio-economic set-up. Aristotle justifies slavery on the grounds that there is natural inequality between men, there is natural rule of the superior over inferiors, and hence the functions must be based on nature, i.e. the function of ruling goes to the superior intellects while the function of the physical labour must go to those who have sound and strong physique but poor intellect, the slaves.
To Aristotle, slavery is acceptable because of three important factors viz., naturalness, usefulness and expediency.
Slavery as Natural
According to Aristotle, slavery is quite in accord with the law of nature. There is natural inequality between men with respect to their capacities for virtue. Some people were born natural slaves and ought to be slaves under any circumstance. Other people were born to rule these slaves, could use these slaves as they pleased, and could treat them as property. Natural slaves were slaves because their souls weren’t complete: they lacked certain qualities, such as the ability to think properly, and so they needed to have masters to tell them what to do.
In other words, there are those whose high endowment of reason fits them to command and direct, and there are those whose low intellect enables them to comprehend and obey orders only. The former are by nature, masters and the latter slaves. One represents the mental strength and the other physical. A slave lacks the capacity to reason sufficiently and to govern himself although he may recognise such capacity in others. Thus, he who can foresee with his mind is by nature intended to be lord and master; and he who can work only with his body is by nature a slave.
Slavery as Necessity
Aristotle says that it is necessary to have slaves by the masters so that they can be free from the physical worries and they can work for the betterment of public in the society. Slaves provide masters leisure time. This enables the masters develop moral and intellectual excellence and actively participate in the affairs of the state.
Aristotle believed that slavery benefited the slaves as well. By being a slave, he would be able to share the virtues of the master and elevate himself; the association with the masters brings “derivative excellence”.
Slavery is Expedient
Aristotle was of the opinion that slaves have sustained the social and economic system of the Greek city-states. The slaves helped the city-states against social disorder and chaos. He thus stated that slavery is a social necessity.
However, the institution of slavery is approved by Aristotle with certain conditions as follows:
- Aristotle makes a distinction between a slave by nature and a slave by law. For instance, the prisoners of war who are being enslaved would constitute a slave by law. Only those who are mentally deficient and virtuously not superior should be enslaved. Aristotle never agreed to the enslavement of all prisoners of war because victory in the war does not necessarily mean intellectual superiority of the victor or the mental deficiency of the vanquished. Prisoners of war could be enslaved only if they were inferior to the captors in their intellect. They are not natural slaves but slaves by bad luck: they just happened to be slaves at a particular time. He was against the idea of slavery by force.
- According to Aristotle, it is not necessary that the child of a slave should always be a natural slave. If he is superior in his mental capacity he will be as free as other free citizens.
- All the slaves should be given the hope and chance of emancipation. He however advocated the liberation of only those slaves whose conduct was good and who developed capacity for reasoning and virtue.
- He also advises the masters to treat their slaves properly and not to abuse them.
- Aristotle does not allow the enslavement of a Greek by a Greek.
Critical Assessment of Aristotle’s Theory of Natural Slavery
Aristotle’s views on slavery reflect his conservatism and primitive outlook towards life. His theory is highly prejudicial and contradictory to the human dignity and the niceties of life. It is prejudicial, in the sense that it presupposed that Greeks were fit to rule the world and they could not be enslaved even if they were defeated by what he regarded as the ‘barbarians’. It is against human dignity, in the sense that he regarded some people as mere property of others.
His theory of slavery is opposed to the concept of social justice, the essence of democracy, and the values of an egalitarian society. Various thinkers and philosophers have strongly defended the idea that all men are equal and no one should be treated as inferior to another.
Aristotle’s views on slavery manifest racial prejudice and are against the values of freedom and equality. If Aristotle had his way, a vast majority of people today would be slaves.
However, many scholars argue that Aristotle’s views on slavery cannot be judged solely from our present context. Slavery was a necessity in the stability of the Greek city-states and Aristotle’s view was a reflection of the same.
Interestingly, Aristotle expressed in his will that his own slaves would be freed and not sold. He also suggested that a slave could become his master’s friend. He recommended their emancipation as a reward for good service. He insisted that masters must treat their slaves properly, and strongly propagated that cruel masters must be subjected to legal punishments.
Aristotle also realised that the institution of slavery was not permanent. It would go with advancement in technology.
Leave a Reply