Intro to social and political philosophy- Mid-term Exam 3,7, 8 and 9

In your opinion, does the state of nature exist? Identify and explain a thinker who disagrees with your stance and their rationale.

1. My Stance: No, the state of nature primarily functions as a philosophical thought experiment or hypothetical construct used by political theorists (like Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau) to analyze human nature, justify political authority, and articulate the necessity of government. It's not an actual historical period or current condition.

2. Thinker Disagreeing (Thomas Hobbes):

   • Thomas Hobbes, in Leviathan, strongly posits that a state of nature can exist and is the condition humanity would fall into without a strong, absolute sovereign power.

   • Rationale: For Hobbes, the state of nature is a "war of all against all" (bellum$ $ omnium$ $ contra$ $ omnes$$), where life is "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short." His rationale is rooted in his pessimistic view of human nature as fundamentally self-interested and driven by a perpetual desire for power, leading inevitably to conflict in the absence of an overarching authority. While he acknowledges it's a hypothetical construct, he treats its potential existence as a constant threat that absolute government must avert.

Furnish a definition of conservatism. Then, briefly discuss how any two thinkers we have read so far align or differ from your definition, pulling from any of their claims.

1. Conservatism Definition: Conservatism is a political and social philosophy that generally advocates for the preservation of traditional institutions, practices, and values. It often emphasizes stability, order, hierarchy, gradual change rather than radical reform, skepticism of human perfectibility, and a cautious approach to innovation, valuing experience and accumulated wisdom over abstract reason.

2. Thinkers Alignment/Difference:

   • Edmund Burke (Aligns): Burke, a foundational figure in conservatism, aligns closely with this definition, particularly in Reflections on the Revolution in France. He champions tradition, warns against abstract theoretical rights in favor of historical rights and inherited institutions, and stresses the organic development of society. His skepticism of radical change and emphasis on inherited wisdom directly reflects conservative tenets.

   • John Locke (Differs): Locke, while emphasizing property rights (which later conservatives would also value), differs significantly because his philosophy is fundamentally rooted in liberal individualism. His concept of natural rights (life, liberty, property) and government founded on consent and the right to revolution (if government oversteps its bounds) challenges the conservative emphasis on tradition, hierarchy, and gradualism. Locke's focus on individual autonomy and radical constitutionalism contrasts with the cautious, tradition-bound nature of conservatism.

What are the differing views on private property among Plato, Aristotle, and how do these views shape their ideas of government?

1. - Plato: In The Republic, Plato advocates for communal property for the guardian class to prevent self-interest from corrupting leadership, prioritizing the state's unity over individual material possessions. This shapes his view of an aristocratic government (rule by guardians) focused on justice and the common good.

   • Aristotle: In Politics, Aristotle supports private property but emphasizes its social function. He believes private property provides incentives for work, fosters generosity, and contributes to a stable society. He criticizes Plato's extreme communism, arguing that private property is essential for a flourishing polis and a mixed constitution (polity) balancing various interests.

In your opinion, does the social contract exist? Identify and explain a thinker who disagrees with your stance and their rationale.

1. My Stance: Yes, the social contract exists conceptually as an implicit agreement among individuals within a society to cooperate for social benefits, sacrificing some individual freedoms for state protection and order. It's a foundational principle justifying governmental authority and citizen obligations.

2. Thinker Disagreeing (Plato):

   • Plato, particularly in The Republic, does not frame the origin or legitimacy of government through the lens of a social contract. Instead, he posits an ideal state founded upon principles of justice, objective truth, and the hierarchical ordering of society based on natural abilities, led by philosopher-kings.

   • Rationale: Plato's ideal state relies on wisdom and justice, where each class (guardians, auxiliaries, producers) performs its function for the good of the whole. The authority of the philosopher-kings is based on their superior knowledge and understanding of the Good, not on the consent of the governed or an agreement among individuals. The state is an organic entity aimed at achieving internal harmony and external justice, rather than a mechanism created by individuals to protect rights or freedoms outlined in a contract. For Plato, the state's legitimacy stems from its approximation to the perfect Form of Justice, not from a foundational agreement between citizens or between citizens and rulers. Therefore, the concept of individuals consenting to form a government to secure rights is absent and fundamentally different from his vision.

Why are Hume and Burke often credited as 'fathers of conservatism,' and how does the term itself take on conflicting meanings? Furnish a definition of conservatism and discuss how two thinkers align or differ, pulling from their claims.

1. Hume & Burke as 'Fathers':

   • Edmund Burke: In Reflections on the Revolution in France, Burke is seen as a founder due to his defense of tradition, inherited rights, gradual change, and skepticism of abstract theoretical rights and radical innovation. He emphasized the organic nature of society and the dangers of intellectual arrogance in political reform.
   • David Hume: His philosophical skepticism, particularly regarding reason's ability to dictate moral or political truth, and his emphasis on custom, habit, and experience as foundations for social order, influenced conservative thought by questioning radical social engineering and abstract principles.

2. Conflicting Meanings of 'Conservatism': The term 'conservatism' takes on conflicting meanings because it is a broad ideological umbrella that adapts to different historical and national contexts. For example:

   • Classical Conservatism: Emphasis on tradition, hierarchy, established institutions (Burkean).
   • Neoconservatism: Often characterized by a belief in assertive foreign policy and a distrust of large-scale government programs at home, sometimes incorporating elements that would be considered liberal by classical conservatives.
   • Fiscal Conservatism: Prioritizes limited government spending, lower taxes, and free markets, which can sometimes conflict with social conservative priorities.
   • The 'conserved' element changes: preserving monarchy/aristocracy vs. preserving free markets/individual liberty.

3. Conservatism Definition: Conservatism is a political and social philosophy advocating for the preservation of traditional institutions, practices, and values. It prioritizes stability, order, hierarchy, and gradual change over radical reform, valuing experience and accumulated wisdom.

4. Thinkers Alignment/Difference:

   • Edmund Burke (Aligns): As discussed, Burke's arguments for historical continuity, organic societal growth, and warnings against revolutionary zeal are central to conservative thought.
   • John Locke (Differs): Locke's emphasis on natural rights, individual autonomy, government by consent of the governed, and the right to revolution fundamentally challenges the conservative adherence to tradition, established hierarchy, and incremental change, positioning him as a foundational liberal thinker.

Discuss how Plato and Aristotle identify and critique the problems arising from desiring excess liberty or excess equality, comparing and contrasting their perspectives.

1. Plato on Excess Liberty/Equality:

   • In The Republic, Plato critiques democracy as a system that arises from the desire for excessive liberty. He argues that the democratic pursuit of limitless freedom for all desires and opinions leads to anarchy and the erosion of all authority.
   • This unchecked liberty eventually results in factionalism, moral decay, and a disregard for virtue and competence. Society becomes chaotic, where citizens ultimately willingly submit to a tyrant who promises order, thereby losing all freedom.
   • While not focusing on 'excess equality' in the modern sense, Plato saw the democratic insistence on counting all opinions and individuals as equally valid (regardless of merit or knowledge) as contributing to this breakdown of order and the neglect of wisdom.

2. Aristotle on Excess Liberty/Equality:

   • In Politics, Aristotle warns against the extremes of constitutional forms, particularly those driven by excessive liberty or excessive equality.
   • Excessive Liberty (Extreme Democracy): He argues that extreme democracy, where liberty is interpreted as doing whatever one pleases, leads to mob rule and instability. It neglects the common good and rational governance in favor of the shifting whims of the majority, potentially oppressing minorities.
   • Excessive Inequality (Extreme Oligarchy/Democracy): Constitutions founded on the exclusive principle of wealth (oligarchy) or numerical equality (extreme democracy) are inherently unstable. Oligarchies fail by prioritizing the rich, while extreme democracies fail by prioritizing the many without regard for merit or balance. Conflicts arise when one group seeks absolute dominance based on one principle.
   • Aristotle advocates for a mixed constitution (polity) that balances elements of oligarchy (propertied class) and democracy (freeborn citizens) to mitigate the dangers of either extreme, seeking a mean where a broad middle class holds power, thus allowing for a more stable and just society.

3. Comparison & Contrast:

   • Similarities: Both thinkers agree that unchecked liberty and an imbalance in equality pose significant threats to political stability and the common good. Both see the pursuit of extremes as leading to undesirable forms of government (tyranny for Plato, unstable cycles for Aristotle).
   • Differences: Plato's critique is highly idealistic and prescriptive, advocating for a rigidly hierarchical state led by philosopher-kings where personal liberty is subordinated to the collective good and cosmic justice. His solution is revolutionary in its structure. Aristotle's critique is more empirical and pragmatic, analyzing existing constitutions to find the most stable and virtuous forms. His solution, the 'polity,' is a more practical, balanced mixed constitution designed to achieve stability by moderating competing claims to liberty and equality, rather than eliminating