The basic form of my question is: Given his extensive reasoning in other areas, why would Aristotle's views on slaves, women, and non-Greeks remain so conservative?
Three answers come to mind regarding this question. Firstly, Aristotle could have simply taken the supposed inferiority of the groups mentioned above for granted, given the widespread belief that they were indeed so; acceptance of this belief might have been so deeply ingrained in his view of the world that he could not comprehend that things might be otherwise without considering them for a very long time, which he chose not to devote to the topic.
Secondly, Aristotle might have actually given the matter a lot of thought and come to the conclusion that these people were actually equal to non-slave Greek men, but then chosen not to publish that conclusion for either selfish reasons or what he thought were reasons for the good of the country. I am inclined to disbelieve this theory, as Aristotle strikes me as being rather too intelligent and intellectually courageous to have taken this path.
Lastly, Aristotle could conceivably have been suffering from a lack of experience. For a large portion of his younger years, he lived in Plato's academy and studied with a lot of other young, philosophical Greek men. By the time he left and became acquainted with more women, slaves, and possibly non-Greek travelers, he may already have formed very strong worldviews which he was hesitant to change. This last option seems the most likely to me.
No comments:
Post a Comment