LITMIR.BIZ

Скачать книгу

and concupiscible parts of the soul) (63).

      Contextually, it is necessary to observe that the Greeks spoke of war in terms of good or just war and incorrect or unjust war, being the nature of the antique Greek society founded upon the notion of justice; nevertheless, it is surprising that it had not been fully articulated the idea of Just War (64).

      According to Plato, war is an inevitable consequence of greed, producing public and private harms. The search of luxury and goods is an ever increasing desire which leads to war: it is a damaging impulse that originates war. The accumulation of goods is implicit in it and it is not laudable. This leads to think in the irascible part of the soul, which makes one acting bravely without subsuming the action under reason, without containing reflexion and wisdom. Because of this, in these cases, the irascible part only wants satisfaction of its desires. Plato concludes that the soldiers must educate their concupiscence , fortify it. Militars must be educated in this sense. Prudence and courage must allow them to know when the should fight, to be considered, gentle with who are not to be fought. In this sense, the best kings are those who remain excellent regarding philosophy and war. And this appears to be real when the right ideals are taught.

      The brutality of war must be at the service of the wisdom of the philosophers.

      The ferocity of the cruel war must be maintained dominating the desires, in a military ethic, at the service of justice. This supposes the control of concupiscence and its excesses as also the intention of noble deeds, with the help of reason; and even the training of the spirit. Due to this, the city is found upon education (paideia). Hence, one must not be delighted in death and brutality. On the other hand, the accumulation of goods is not loable, and this is implied in war. The sole satisfaction of desires, which allows to act bravely, must be done under reason (66). The irascibility of the soldiers must be moderated as courage and temperance. Because of this, Plato notes, the rulers are those who know about philosophy and war, allowing through a good education a military ethic (66). The soul must be rightly exercised, being true soldiers those who act according to reason (67).

      A perpetual peace involves the knowledge of the Good, founding of Justice.

      In the Book V of the Republic, Plato refers to the laws of the military code which determines the conduct in war. Pillage and havoc must be avoided; only the responsible of a conflict must be considered and chastised as enemies; it must not be enslaved or killed a defeated population; the battle must be effected in a just way and mutually acceptable for peace so that the war does not continue indefinitely. Because of this, the military objective must not be divorced from moral virtue (68). In this sense, the Laws consider that war must serve peace (and, in Aristotle continues this way of thinking which will gravitate in Occident) (69).

      It is interesting the observation of Tristan Husby regarding this problem:

      “Plato reunites war and justice through his psychology. He, like Thucydides, saw human nature as the primary cause of war. But unlike Thucydides argued that this aggressiveness, thumos, could be controlled, fostered and limited. Limited because otherwise it would destroy the polis, fostered because without it the polis would be conquered... War is primarily necessary to insure that the polis remains independent...” (70).

      Because of what has been said, the importance of war in the state-city is reflected in the Republic as a necessary activity within the ideal and completely just society (71).

      Nevertheless, it is important to remember that according to Plato “el justo no debe hacer mal a nadie”(72); that is to say, prudence and goodness must direct the just soul (73). Because of this, peace being a politically considered pact to cease war, is also the harmonious conduct of the three parts of the soul, ruled by the reason which permits justice, founded in the idea of Good. From this derived in Western culture not only the idea of Just War, as I already observed. It generated a spiritualist stream of inward tranquillity and peace of mind, generally related to the divine. This last current will be of extreme importance in Middle Ages, and also in Christian religion.

      Aristotle develops the platonic concepts from a critical point of view. Virtue and politics will be tightly related, so that the Nichomachean Ethic states that the morality lies upon the social activity of man. In this perspective, war is natural instrument or mean for peace and freedom.

      There are three notions to be considered in order to understand war in Aristotle: slavery as a natural state, just war, the necessity of war for peace as the material work for the contemplative leisure (74).

      Equality and democracy are not universal in Aristotle´s philosophy. They refer specifically to the free man and the landlord. Woman is submitted to him (75). And some human beings are by nature instruments or tools to the service of handwork and the physical effort, and they are a belonging or property of the free man (76). Their tasks are negligible regarding the political activities and the contemplative leisure of the citizens of the polis. Aristotle says in the Politics: “Therefore that there are cases of people of whom some are free men and others slaves by nature, and for this slavery is an institution expedient and just”(77).

      From this viewpoint, peace is relative to war, as work is the opportunity for leisure. In this time, the hard manual work was done by the slaves, meanwhile the war assured the independence of the city state and its tranquillity. Leisure belonged to the free citizen and, according to Aristotle, he must dedicate himself to contemplation and then to politics, since the former was the highest activity which springs from the autarchy and the absence of fatigue; the happy man lives through contemplation a happy live in a divine mode (78).

      This kind of comprehension has been already considered in the work of Plato, a worldview which will orientate the personal and social order for more than the Middle Ages (79). Even more, according to Aristotle, the barbarians are not rectors by nature, and , because of this, they must be submitted: war is necessary (80).

      The true, free man, being contemplative, practises the virtue of wisdom, the excellence of being human, the arete, The peace of the ethic and dianoethic must be exercised in politics as philosophy, according to the right use of reason (81) , impossible activities for the woman and the slave. I one remembers the distinction , not only Aristotelian but also relative to Western tradition, between the highest and the lowest, ruler and ruled (that is to say, the immovable hierarchy) (82), one may understand that here may be no place in Aristotle´s society of free men for living tools or slaves and women (83).

      In this situation, the soldiers are necessary so much as the traders and the workers or servants, since it must be kept the freedom from the slavery of invaders (84). The independence of the state claims for the possibility of war.

      Aristotle refers to the revolution in the Politics. It is due to disproportionate inequality, being the desire of equality the reason which directs the rebellion (85). The motifs are the desire of profit, honour, insolence, fear, desire of superiority, intrigues, reject, avarice and others (86). The revolutions may be realized through fraud or force (87). Constitutional governements may be overturned because of a deviation from constitution (89).

      Like Plato, Aristotle points out the guardians must not be intemperate (90).

      According with the guiding notion that the natural is the just and necessary, Aristotle observes that the war must not be studied to enslave someone but principally for not being enslaved (91): “they should seek to be masters only over those who deserve to be slaves”(92). Even, the legislator must direct his military measures to he provision of leisure and the establishment of peace (93). And this because: “peace is the end of war, and leisure of toil... for truly, the proverb says, “there is no leisure for slaves”, and those who cannot face danger like men are slaves of any invader”(94). Aristotle concludes that war imposes man to be temperate and just (95).

      Because of what has been said, Aristotle says in his Nichomachean Ethic:

      “The practical virtues are exercised in politics or in warfare, but the pursuits seem to be unleisured. Those of war entirely so, for no one desires to be at war for the sake of being at war, not deliberately takes steps at war... “(96).

      One makes war in order to obtain peace (98). This is the central thought of Aristotle. There is war for peace to be.

      Now,

Скачать книгу