It isn't equal or cohesive. There's a plot by Spartiates who had fallen out of the census in the fourth century to try to overthrow the state - because there were a *lot* of them (the hypomeiones or inferiors).
-
Tämä twiitti ei ole saatavilla.
-
Tämä twiitti ei ole saatavilla.
-
Tämä twiitti ei ole saatavilla.
-
Tämä twiitti ei ole saatavilla.
-
Invalidates? Of course not. But we have to read sources critically. Aristotle and Xenophon are both openly snobby elitists who think the good-and-noble (kaloi kagathoi) *ought* to dominate affairs because they are *actually* better than poor people.
We might reasonably question the rubric that belief is going to lead them to use in evaluating a society, the same way we might doubt Cicero's opinion on the divine rightness of Roman law.
-
-
And I want to be clear here - both of those men are *explicit* in this point. I'm not reading into Aristotle when he claims that the high-born and noble are simply capable of more virtue than everyone else. Nor was that a universal ancient belief.
-
(Contrast Cicero on natural law, for instance, where he insists that virtue is equally possible for all persons.)
Keskustelun loppu
Uusi keskustelu -
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.