Aquinas [1]
Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274)
-born to a noble family, but didn’t go for it...
- became a prelate at age 17
-spent the rest of his life in study and writing...
- incredibly influential....
Aquinas - On Kingship [2]
• General note on Aquinas: We have to finesse his biases as a servant of the RC church
• I will (try to) note when this matters and when it doesn’t...• His official position is:• “God Governs the Universe by his Providence” [from summa contra gentiles]
• - which might seem to commit him to Theocracy• It doesn’t (cf. Augustine) - but it does bias him in that direction• Obviously the question of how theology is related to political philosophy will
be a main one. Stand by ...
• “On Kingship” • Here Aquinas is giving advice to an actual ruler (the king of Cyprus)
• Both his theological bias and his connection with the ruler in question might bias him in his argument... just something to bear in mind.
Aquinas - on Kingship [3]
• “Men in Society Must Be under Rulers”
• So: why must men be under rulers?
• 1. “A ship must have a helmsman”• [“a ship wouldn’t get to its destination if not guided by a helsman]
• Q: is society a ship??
• - reasons why we should not think so:
• - society is a whole lot of people
• - each is going various places
• - they’re not all going the same place
• - But ships necessarily go one way at a time...
• - society doesn’t have a unified set of sails, oars, etc.
Aquinas [4]
• “man has an end toward which all his actions are directed, being an intelligent being”
• “So man needs someone to direct him”• [Problems:
• - back to the Aristotelian mistake: each man has “an end” (or a lot of ends) toward which he directs his actions
• not: we all have the same end toward which one super-ruler can direct us...
• “man is by nature a political and social animal”
• “he cannot provide for his life alone”
• [Agreed. That argues for social order of some sort - but why Political?
• Not so obvious ...!]
Aquinas [5]
• 2. “It isn’t possible for one person alone to know everything by unaided reason.”
• [Class - tell us what’s wrong with that one!]
• 3. “in society, people can help each other” • [right. But do they need government to do this??]• [-- e.g., how does knowledge grow?
• 3a. By both individual and cooperative research.• Will this be promoted by a king? • - is it even promoted by the Dean??!
Aquinas [6]
• “Community Breakup”
• 4. “If each provides only what is convenient for himself, the group “would break up” unless one had responsibility for the whole.”
• - so?
• “Private good and the common good are not the same”
• Aquinas: private good divides the community, whereas common concerns unite it.
• - does he mean “private goods” such as fried eggs and scuba diving?
• - or murder and arson?
• i) the first sort don’t seem to be a problem
• - we do have a common interest in getting our separate private goods achieved
• - market exchange, e.g., forwards this
Aquinas [7]
• “Community Breakup”
• ii) criminal action is indeed a problem, but privacy is not the source of it!
• - (murder is an interpersonal evil, not a good.
• Or does he mean, the murderer thinks it’s good for himself?
• True: but “public murder” (say, war) is even worse!
• - b) and, so what?
• - the “breakup” which is just different people doing different things is arguably good, not bad]
Aquinas [8]
• “in each thing we find a superior part that rules;
• likewise in a group, there must be something that rules.”
• [just what his friend the ruler wants to hear!
• - but do trees have “superior parts that rule”?]
• And if we all were moved to the CG, would we need a king??• We can see what’s coming: what “moves” everyone to the common good is
the Government, right?
• And regarding the “moving” point, Aquinas is going to claim that Law does this -
• and that Law is Rational.
• [Comment: Well, each of us is rational, though.
• Maybe there’s something in each of us that “moves” us to the Common Good, without having to have a King do it for us!
Aquinas [9]
• “The proper end of a group of free men is different from that of a group of slaves”
• That is because, as he notes, the free determine their own actions, whereas a slave, qua slave, belongs to another.”
• Where, then, do we go from here?
• Aquinas now proposes that “If a ruler directs his subjects to the common good, that is “right because appropriate”
• whereas if he aims at his own good, that is tyranny - unjust and perverse.
• (He astutely notes that tyranny by a few, or by many, for that matter, is also possible.)
Aquinas [10]
• 3b. “besides what moves each to his own private good, there must be something that moves everyone to the common good of the many.”
• Note: A distinction is needed here: between
• 3b.i. something moves everyone to the common good
• 3b.ii: something moves everyone to have a view of the common good....
• These are decidedly not the same - unless
• (a) ii = i, and
• (b) ii gives us the right directions re (i)
• - but surely it might not!
• example: the free market.
• Here people don’t act with a view to the common good
• but they achieve it anyway,
• and (arguably) better than with “social” (not to mention political!) direction....
Aquinas [11]
• The “End” of Society
• 1. Argument: When things are ordered to some end, there is a right and a wrong
• way to proceed;
• - likewise with government
• [but, reminder: “The proper end of a group of free men is different from that of a
• group of slaves”
• (recall: The free determine their own actions, whereas a slave,
• qua slave, belongs to another)
Aquinas [12]
• 2. The Difference between Just and Unjust Rulers:
• If a ruler directs his subjects to the common good, that is right
• because appropriate
• whereas if he aims at his own good, that is
• tyranny - unjust and perverse. [recall Thrasymachus]
• [note: Tyranny by a few, or by the mob, is also possible. But for the same (Aristotelian) reason: the ruler or rulers seeks his or their own good at the expense of the ruled.]
• [Question: is he simply assuming the above? Or is he arguing for it?]
Aquinas [13]
• 3. Better One Ruler or Many?
• argument: Community welfare requires
• “unity in what we call peace”
• - no peace, no beneficial life.
• So the most important responsibility of the ruler is:
• to achieve unity in peace.
• > “That which is already itself one can promote unity better
• -> So, government by one is better than by many”
• [Does it follow? Recall Aristotle against Plato: too much unity is not wanted..]
• [Q: What if you could have disunity in peace?]
Aquinas [14]
• 4. Government is “Natural”:
• 1) Whatever accords with nature is best
• 2) by nature government is by one - as the heart moves body (other
• cases: Queen bees, and God, the Maker and Ruler of all)
• [Aquinas does not mention herds of cows, colonies of birds, and so on
• - where’s the “leader” there?
• [In any case, why should it matter what “nature” does?
Aquinas [15]
The problem of Tyranny
• [?] What if this one ruler is a bad one? (a tyrant...)• The tyrant uses force to oppress instead of justice to rule.• (as we’ve noted already, “ People can be oppressed also by a few, as in oligarchy, or by
the mob, using the force of numbers to oppress the rich - thus even the whole people can be guilty of tyranny.”
• [right: that’s a caution to democrats...]
• What to do about Tyranny?• “A community must do its best to avoid giving the rule to one who will become a tyrant.
• But what do we do if he does become one?
• “If the tyranny is not extreme, it is better to tolerate it”
• [why? Because taking action may be even worse
• (1) Even if opposition to the tyrant prevails, there tend to be deep divisions in the populace
• - which divides into rival groups.
• (2) And the one who aids the community in overthrowing the tyrant, very often, becomes himself a still worse one. ]
Aquinas - on Kingship [16]
• What if the tyranny is unbearable?
• Some say that the brave should then risk death to rid the community of him.
• Yet this is “not in accord with Apostolic teaching.”
• [oh, right, yeah....]
• St. Peter teaches us to be subject not only to good and temperate rulers, but to ill-tempered ones too.
• [well, bully for St. Paul!]
• For consider that men who would make good assassins are unlikely to make good kings.
• - important, and true...
• the best solution is not by private action of a few but by proceeding through public authority.
• The community together may depose the king or restrict his power; even if it agreed to obey him forever, this does not bind them if he abuses his power by becoming a tyrant
• Q: where does this leave us??
• [Trouble is, the tyrant is the “public authority”!
• - there’s a problem here ....!]
Aquinas [17]
• Let’s hear it for the Priests!:
• Spiritual guidance is needed to “direct man to the port of eternal life”
• - Eternal beatitude with God is the end of a whole society.
• (If that end were health, doctors would rule; if wealth, a business
• executive; if knowledge, a scholar.
• - But, being what it is, we need a priest!)
• The end of human society is the virtuous life.
• - Under the New Law [of Christ], kings should be subject to priests.
• [imagine that!
• [And an academic might say: kings should be subject to PhD’s!]
• ....
Aquinas [18]
• The King Directs to the good Life
• Duty of the king: promote the good life of the community
• “- so that it leads to happiness in heaven”
• [Q: is that the real reason??]
• What is required for the individual’s good life:
• (1) virtue, and
• (2) a sufficiency of material goods
• - which is necessary for virtuous action [cf. Aristotle...].
• [Comment: that’s a good shot at it... but how about social life, etc? Art? Sport? Or do those all come with the second?]
• [disagreement about this could lead to political disagreement....
Aquinas [19]
• What is required for the good life of a group:• First, peace
• Second “acting well by the community”
• Third a sufficiency of necessities
• Questions:
• (a) are these in the right order?
• [A suggestion: First, Third, Second [on the ground that wealth for all supports peace and enables acting well by the community ... ]
Aquinas [20]
• Peace• -> but perhaps peace is necessary and sufficient for “sufficiency”
• (1) Peace allows men to engage in work and exchange
• this promotes prosperity
• (2) - Also to form clubs, associations, churches, etc.
Aquinas [21]
• (2) “Acting well by the community”?
• what is that?
• [Isn’t this direction to peace??]
• [not reproduced in our anthology: the example of “community festivals”
• And: tennis clubs, symphony concerts, marathon runs ....
• Question: mightn’t NGOs do a better job at that?
• Question: is centralized community direction necessary for this?
• - that’s the main question...
• Note: it’s easy to see why governments would want to get into the act
• - but should they??
• Aquinas’ arguments don’t prove it
• at any rate - not yet!
Aquinas [22]
• “Sufficiency”• (3) - why only “sufficiency?” How about wealth?
• arguable: wealth causes peace and acting-well-by-community
• (on the one hand, wealth enables people to afford more expensive means of war
• On the other, they undercut the motive to it...)
• [Monks may think that not very much is enough!
• - But do we??
• [Aquinas seems to be following Aristotle (big surprise!) in thinking that it’s fairly easy to have “too much” wealth and that that’s bad...
• Is he right??]
Aquinas - on Kingship [23]
• Summing up “On Kingship”
• (1) claims that we need government’
• (2) that monarchy is better (more unity)
• (3) that tyranny is evil
• (4) but we shouldn’t do too much to resist it..
• (5) what governments ought to do is promote
peace, community, and wealth (in that order)