Question: In Politics, Aristotle discusses the risks associated with giving excellent people their proportionate share of political power

1) In Politics, Aristotle discusses the risks associated with giving excellent people their proportionate share of political power (e.g., at III.10, 1281a28).

2) What does he see as the main liabilities of giving them their "due" in terms of office-holding? Compare Aristotle's analysis of this problem with how you think Socrates would respond to this concern in Republic, and how Pseudo-Xenophon would respond to it in Constitution of the Athenians.

STUDY TIPS/ DRAFT:

1. In Politics, Aristotle indeed discusses the risks associated with giving excellent people their proportionate share of political power. He believes that while it is important to recognize and reward excellence, there are significant liabilities associated with it when it comes to office-holding. Aristotle's concerns primarily revolve around the potential dangers of an elite ruling class:

• Lack of motivation for rulers: Aristotle argues that if excellent individuals are given their due in terms of office-holding, they may become complacent and lose their motivation to govern effectively. They might assume that they deserve power by virtue of their excellence alone, without putting in the necessary effort to rule justly and wisely.

• Oligarchic tendencies: Aristotle worries that when excellent individuals accumulate political power, they may form an oligarchy—a government controlled by a small, privileged group. This can lead to inequality, corruption, and a disregard for the interests of the broader citizenry.

• Alienation of the masses: Giving too much power to the excellent few may alienate the majority of citizens who feel excluded from the political process. This can lead to social unrest and a breakdown in the stability of the state.

2. Comparing Aristotle's analysis with how Socrates and Pseudo-Xenophon might respond:

• Socrates (from Plato's Republic): Socrates, as presented by Plato, might have a different perspective. In the Republic, Socrates argues for a philosopher-king or guardian class of rulers who possess wisdom, virtue, and a deep understanding of the Good. He believes that these philosopher-rulers should govern, and their authority should not be based solely on their excellence in a conventional sense but on their philosophical wisdom. Socrates' approach focuses on the idea that true excellence is moral and intellectual, and those who possess such qualities should rule for the benefit of all, guided by a pursuit of the highest truth and justice.

• Pseudo-Xenophon (from Constitution of the Athenians): Pseudo-Xenophon, in his Constitution of the Athenians, may have a more pragmatic approach compared to Aristotle. He might emphasize the importance of maintaining a balance between different elements of society. Pseudo-Xenophon might argue for a mixed government that combines elements of democracy, aristocracy, and monarchy to prevent the concentration of power in the hands of a single group. He might also stress the importance of regular elections and accountability mechanisms to prevent the liabilities Aristotle mentions, such as oligarchic tendencies.

In summary, while Aristotle sees risks in giving excellent people their due in terms of office-holding, Socrates and Pseudo-Xenophon might offer different perspectives. Socrates would emphasize the importance of wisdom and virtue in rulership, while Pseudo-Xenophon might advocate for a balanced and accountable system of governance to mitigate the liabilities associated with concentrated power.