(by Ömer Faruk Yalçın)
| The dual understanding of the emergence of the state is
a significant subject of philosophy. According to Thomas Hobbes, people are
equal by nature and have problematic principles which are competition, diffidence
and glory. Thus, the use of violence for these principles to achieve gain,
security and reputation results in a constant war which is called the state of
nature (1). In order to end such war, people transferred their power to a
single subject through a social contract with mutual consent (2). In sum,
people were living in the state of nature at first, but then, to end the social
conflict, people started living together and formed cities, according to
Hobbes. |
(3)
On the other hand, Aristotle claims that “every state
exists by nature” and since it provides self-sufficiency, it is the best
association (4). This is what differentiates humans from animals according to
him, since “man is a political animal” living in cities (5). Aristotle is
called a political naturalist because of his ideas (6).
According to the theory of evolution which gives the
most plausible explanation of the existence of human beings, Homo sapiens
sapiens are evolved from sea creatures, i.e. fish. To give more details, the
evouliton process occurred for 2100 million of years, chronologically in this
order: Eukaryota, Animalia, Chordata, Vertebrates, Tetrapoda, Amniota,
Mammalia, Theriiformes, Eutheria, Boreoeutheria, Euarchontoglires, Euarchonta,
Primatomorpha, Primates, Haplorrhini, Simiiformes, Catarrhini, Hominoidea,
Hominidae, Homininae, Hominini, Hominina, Homo, (Archaic) Homo sapiens, Homo
sapiens sapiens (7).
(8)
Therefore, in order to believe Aristotle’s idea that
the states are by nature, one must refuse the evolution theory. In other words,
Hobbesian idea of the emergence of the state by the social contract fits more
to the theory of evolution. To explain further, people were living in the
nature before they were Homo sapiens sapiens and they did not form any cities.
Instead, they were living in small communities like apes and they lacked a
political order.
Thus, it can be said that the theory of evolution
contradicts with Aristotle’s argument of natural states, and since there is no
other theory that explains the existence of human kind better than evolution,
it is hard to accept that the states are by nature.
References:
(1) Hobbes,
Thomas. Leviathan. 1588-1679. and
Macpherson, Crawford Brough, 1911- ed. Leviathan; Penguin, 1985. p. 185.
(2) Ibid.
p. 191, 194.
(3) Inglehart,
Ronald. The State of Nature: Absence
Makes the Heart Grow Fonder?. 16 April 2011. Last access 20 December 2013.
Image. URL = <http://lifeexaminations.wordpress.com/2011/04/16/the-state-of-nature-absence-makes-the-heart-grow-fonder/>.
(4)
Aristotle.
The Politics. Revised ed. London:
Penguin Classics, 1981. Print. p. 59.
(5) Ibid.
p. 60.
(6) Miller,
Fred. Aristotle's Political Theory.
The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2012 Edition). Last access 20
December 2013. Edward N. Zalta (ed.). URL =
<http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2012/entries/aristotle-politics/>.
(7) Wikipedia,
the free encyclopedia. Timeline of human
evolution. Last access 20 December 2013. URL = <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_human_evolution>.
(8) Tamura, N.. Evolution Project. Last access 20 December 2013. Image. URL = <http://ntamura.deviantart.com/art/Evolution-project-178230251>.
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder