Abstract
Aristotle includes democracy among the deviant constitutions. Democracy, as he understands it is, is not merely rule by the many but rule by a multitude lacking in virtue. Democracy takes different forms, but among the worst, he contends, is one like the Athenian democracy which numbers merchants among the citizens. For occupations such as commerce and banking are inherently vicious. Consequently, the democracies in which the mercantile class is prominent are especially unjust, corrupt, and unstable. In this essay I examine and evaluate Aristotle’s indictment of commercial democracy. Since his argument ultimately rests on his theory of moral virtue, I set forth the basic principles of Aristotle’s theory of virtue and consider how he applies them to common commercial practices. I then reflect on whether Aristotle would have arrived at similar conclusions about these practices if he had been acquainted with the basic principles of microeconomics. Finally, I consider the implication of this assessment for Aristotle’s critique of Athenian democracy.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Translations from Aristotle’s Politics are from Reeve (1998).
- 2.
This list omits the sixth class, which are called priests (Pol. VII.8 1328b11-13).
- 3.
Translation from Pangle (1980).
- 4.
See Miller (Miller 1995, chapter 4). Noncitizens were barred from participating in the assembly by law; cf. Demosthenes 25.42, 92.
- 5.
Aristotle describes the Athenian democracy as extreme at Pol. II.12 1274a7-11 and VI.4 1319b21; see also Const. At. 42.1. The Xenophon passage contradicts the widespread scholarly opinion that the Athenian citizens played no role in commerce; e.g. especially Hasebroek (1978) and Finley (1982). For arguments that Athenian citizens included tradesmen and bankers, see Cohen (1992, 2000).
- 6.
Dover (1994, pp. 172–173).
- 7.
Newman (1887, p. 138).
- 8.
Translations from Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics are by W. D. Ross (revised by J. O. Urmson) in Barnes (1984).
- 9.
Aristotle’s term ison can mean either “equal” or “fair” and is equivalent to dikaion in this context. See NE V.1 1129a31-b1.
- 10.
Aristotle’s analysis has spawned a vast scholarly literature, including the valuable articles in Blaug (1991). This includes M. I. Finley’s influential and highly critical essay, “Aristotle and Economic Analysis.” Meikle (1995) offers a sympathetic interpretation. For a critical review of Meikle, see Miller (1998).
- 11.
- 12.
See Mei (2009).
- 13.
On the relationship of wealth to virtue, see Hadreas (2002).
- 14.
- 15.
“Usury” translates obolostatikȇ, which means literally “the art of weighing coins” (an obol was an Athenian coin). For the ancient Greeks the related term obolostatȇs, “coin weigher,” had a connotation like “loan shark.” Nowadays “usury” commonly means “charging exorbitant interest,” but it formerly referred to any charging of interest on a loan. On medieval theories see Noonan (1957).
- 16.
This discussion is indebted to the analysis by A. R. J. Turgot in an essay written in 1769 and republished as “Value and Money” in Turgot (1977, p. 133–148). Turgot observes that “the introduction of exchange between our two men increases the wealth of both of them, that is, it gives them both a greater quantity of satisfaction in return for the same resources” (1977, p. 144). The example used here is adapted from Turgot but is modified in order to relate it to Aristotle’s virtue theory.
- 17.
See Rothbard (1987).
- 18.
Turgot explains originary interest in terms of time preference in a paper written in 1770 and republished in condensed form as “Extracts from ‘Paper on Lending at Interest’” (1770) in Turgot (1977). Turgot rejects the view that exchange should be judged as just or unjust based on the “intrinsic value” or “metaphysical equality” of the commodities exchanged.
- 19.
Modern economists distinguish between risk (where an outcome has an objective probability) from mere uncertainty. See Knight (1921).
- 20.
- 21.
See Hadreas (2002, p. 370) for this interpretation.
- 22.
Compare Hadreas (2002, p. 371).
- 23.
This paper draws on my article, “Aristotle and Business: Friend or Foe?” in Wealth, Commerce, and Philosophy ed. Eugene Heath and Byron Kaldis (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, forthcoming). I thank the University of Chicago Press for permitting the reuse of material from that article in revised form here. I am grateful to David Keyt for helpful suggestions on the penultimate draft.
References
Baldwin, J.W. 1959. The medieval theories of the just price: Romanists, canonists, and theologians in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 49 (4): 5–90.
Barnes, J., ed. 1984. The complete works of Aristotle: The Revised Oxford Translation. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Blaug, M. 1991. Aristotle (383–211 BC). Brookfield: Elgar.
Cohen, E.E. 1992. Athenian economy and society: A banking perspective. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
———. 2000. The Athenian nation. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Collins, D. 1987. Aristotle and business. Journal of Business Ethics 6: 567–572.
de Roover, R. 1958. The concept of the just price: Theory and economic policy. Journal of Economic History 18: 418–434.
Dover, K.J. 1994. Greek popular morality in the time of Plato and Aristotle. Indianapolis: Hackett.
Finley, M.I. 1982. Economy and society in ancient Greece. New York: Viking.
Hadreas, P. 2002. Aristotle on the vices and virtue of wealth. Journal of Business Ethics 39: 361–376.
Hasebroek, J. 1978. Trade and politics in ancient Greece. Chicago: Ares. Original work published 1933.
Hayek, F.A. 1945. The use of knowledge in society. American Economic Review 35 (4): 519–530.
Knight, F.H. 1921. Risk, uncertainty, and profit. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Mei, T.S. 2009. The preeminence of use: Reevaluating the relation between use and exchange in Aristotle’s economic thought. Journal of the History of Philosophy 47 (4): 523–548.
Meikle, S. 1995. Aristotle’s economic thought. Oxford: Clarendon.
———. 1996. Aristotle on business. The Classical Quarterly 46 (New Series): 138–151.
Miller, F.D., Jr. 1995. Nature, justice, and rights in Aristotle’s politics. Oxford: Clarendon.
———. 1998. Was Aristotle the first economist? Apeiron 31 (4): 387–398.
Newman, W.L. 1887. The Politics of Aristotle. Vol. 1. Oxford: Clarendon.
Noonan, J.T., Jr. 1957. The scholastic analysis of usury. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Pangle, T.L. 1980. The Laws of Plato. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Reeve, C.D.C. 1998. Aristotle Politics. Indianapolis: Hackett.
Rothbard, M.N. 1987. Time preference. In The new Palgrave: A dictionary of economics, ed. J. Eatwell, M. White, and P. Newman, vol. 4, 644–666. London: Macmillan.
Sowell, T. 1980. Knowledge and decision. New York: Basic Books.
Turgot, A.R.J. 1977. The Economics of A. R. J. Turgot. Trans. P.D. Groenewegen. Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. (Original work published 1769)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Miller, F.D. (2018). Aristotle on Democracy and the Marketplace. In: Anagnostopoulos, G., Santas, G. (eds) Democracy, Justice, and Equality in Ancient Greece. Philosophical Studies Series, vol 132. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96313-6_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96313-6_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-96312-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-96313-6
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)