The World Explored, the World Suffered Science and tech Issue Nr. 12 November 2018(clone) - Page 19

moral  law  and  each  other  could  build  a  cosmopolitan  world  in  approximately  one   hundred  thousand  years  time.     There  is  a  suggestion  that  Aristotle's  position  is  an  elitist  one  in  virtue  of  some  of  his   remarks  about  slavery.  My  reading  of  Aristotle's  position  is  that  the  only  legitimate  form   of  slavery  in  conditions  of  peace    is  what  he  called  "natural  slavery",  a  form  of  slavery  in   which  the  human  is  not  sufficiently  rational  to  take  care  of  themselves.  I  do  not  believe   that  Aristotle  is  arguing  that  some  people  are  more  stupid  than  others  but  rather  that   some  peoples  rationality  is  so  compromised(brain  damage  severe  psychological  trauma   etc),  that  if  they  were  left  to  themselves  they  would  be  unable  to  take  care  of  themselves.   They  would  wander  around  the  countryside  homeless  until  they  died  of  exhaustion,  the   cold,  disease  etc.    Taking  care  of  these  people  in  your  home(as  the  Greeks  did)  would   basically  be  an  act  of  charity  even  if  they  were  expected  to  contribute  with  their  labour   to  the  upkeep  of  the  property  and  the  family.  There  were  no  mental  institutions  during   this  time.  The  Greeks  were  just  beginning  to  think  that  hearing  voices  was  a  sign  that  all   was  not  well  with  those  who  reported  such  phenomena.There  is  another  suggested  form   of  legitimate  slavery  Aristotle  refers  to  which  would  not  have  fallen  into  this  category   and  that  is  the  slaves  that  are  taken  in  a  just  war.  If  another  city  attacks  your  city   without  any  provocation  and  you  defeat  them  in  battle,  the  price  that  must  be  paid,  it  is   argued,  is  that  those  soldiers  who  are  captured  alive  should  become  slaves  perhaps  until   some  kind  of  debt  has  been  discharged.  In  a  state  of  war  normal  political  and  ethical   rules  are  suspended(You  may  kill  the  enemy):  that  the  slave  is  allowed  to  keep  his  life   seems  also  in  such  circumstances  to  be  a  charitable  act,  a  sign  that  hostilities  are  now   over.  I  do  not  think  any  of  the  arguments  presented  against  Aristotle  fall  into  the   category  of  elitism.  Smith  refers  to  Yale  and  its  selection  of  a  small  percentage  of  the   population  for  leadership  positions  as    "Aristotelian"  which  I  think  is  a  mistake  if  the   above  reasoning  is  correct.  Aristotle  is  a  believer  in  excellence  and  it  seems  to  me  that   Yale  University  would  not  obviously  contradict  his  belief.  In  this  context  we  ought  to   point  out  that  he  does  not  exclude  the  rule  of  the  many  from  being  excellent.  Indeed  he   firmly  believes  that  the  multi-­‐limbed,  multi-­‐voiced,  multi  senses  of  the  many  provide  a   surer  ground  that  all  aspects  of  the  problem  of  ruling  will  be  respected.