1. Aristotle (and some Thucydides)
16 July 2008
Note that the third tutorial is perhaps too full, whereas the first two (on Tuesdays) have only a few people in them. Perhaps some people in the third session could sign up for the Tuesday tutorials? Or are the Tuesday sessions not working for the majority of people?

2. The Melian Debate
We both alike know that into the discussion of human affairs the question of justice only enters where there is equal power to enforce it, and that the powerful exact what they can, and the weak grant what they must. (5.89)

3. The Melian Debate Athens: Justice is only possible among equals (5.89)
Melos: justice is the “common protection” of all (5.90)
Athens: we are content to take the risk (5.91)

4. The Melian debate
Athens: It’s in the interest of the weak to yield to the strong (5.91)
Melos: it’s not in our interest to be slaves – we could remain neutral (5.92)
Athens: the other option is death; anyway, neutrality won’t serve our interests (5.93, 5.95)

5. The Melian Debate
Melos: Athenian policy will create more enemies among neutrals (5.98)
Athens: our cost-benefit calculations suggest that is the less important risk (5.99)

6. The Melian Debate
Melos: it would be dishonorable of us not to try to resist, especially since your empire seems so risky, and since our allies or the gods may find it in the interest to help us (5.100, 5.102, 5.104, 5.106, 5.108, 5.110)
Athens: hope is not a plan, and the almost certain outcome of resistance is death; anyway, everyone else (including the gods) would do as we do (5.101, 5.103, 5.105, 5.107, 5.109, 5.111)

7. The Outcome
In the end, the Melians prefer to defend themselves and attempt to preserve their liberty, and after some initially successful resistance, are ultimately crushed.
Did the Melians do the right thing?

8. The Melian Debate What does the Melian debate show?
The corruption of the Athenians by war
The truth of the Athenian thesis
The untenability of the Athenian thesis

9. The Sicilian Disaster

10. Is “realism” realistic?
Does justice matter in international relations?
Crude realist (the Athenian envoys at Melos): no, it doesn’t matter
Enlightened realist (Diodotus): the pursuit of interest depends on not alienating allies and not making enemies needlessly
Non- “realist”: there are limits to the pursuit of mere interest

11. Thucydides Can we say anything about Thucydides’ own position?
There are limits to justice in war: interest takes priority
There are also limits to the pursuit of power dissociated from justice
Justice is fragile: war corrupts peoples and individuals, and war is inevitable
Is Thucydides a “realist”?

12. Thucydides as Tragedy

13. Thucydides as Tragedy
The world is not arranged in a way that would allow justice to triumph, but neither is it arranged in a way that would allow the complete pursuit of interest
Athens as the tragic hero brought down by Hubris

14. Aristotle
The Thucydidean tradition is tragic: there is a conflict between necessity and justice. But there is a different Greek tradition that is, in some ways, anti-tragic. This is the tradition that begins with Socrates, the tradition of the philosophers.
It is not a tradition that focuses very much, if at all, on the “international” realm, unlike the Thucydidean tradition. Neither Plato nor Aristotle nor many of their successors showed much interest in thinking about questions of war and peace, and about the justice of war; in some ways they accepted the Thucydidean view about the impotence of justice outside the polis
So we’re not going to find in Aristotle much about international relations per se. But Aristotle is still the most influential political philosopher of antiquity; in a sense much of Ancient political thought is Aristotelian. It is only with Hobbes, who translated Thucydides, that we get a real alternative to Aristotle. So I’m going to spend a lot of time on Aristotle, even though you may find that he has very little to say about international relations
On the other hand, Aristotle, unlike Thucydides, is very clear about his own position. His writing is recognizably philosophical: he makes arguments to tell you what he thinks and why he thinks these views are right.
I’ve asked you to read a fair chunk of Aristotle’s politics in the course outline. For the lectures, you can probably skate by on what’s in the Brown, Nardin and Rengger book, but in general I would like for you to do the more extensive reading that is actually assigned, especially if you are planning to write an essay on one of the topics on Aristotle.

15. Nature: what is the “natural” in Aristotle?
The natural is…
What is not made by human beings
What happens normally or for the most part
What is complete
The not-natural is…
What is made by human beings
What happens only occasionally or by accident; what is impossible
What is incomplete or overgrown, due to some failure of development
The starting point for Aristotle, as for many other Greek philosophers, is the idea of nature