| dc.description.abstract | In recent years, political theorists witnessed two explosions of Aristotle scholarship. One, which I call commentary scholarship, aims to uncover Aristotle’s argument. The other, which I call appropriation scholarship, creates political theories inspired by Aristotle’s thought. Appropriation scholarship allows its readers to tease out implications of emphasis – that is, to explain how emphasizing aspects of Aristotle’s argument colors the appropriator’s conclusions. The projects of appropriation scholarship fall into four broad instantiations, which I call Modified Aristotelianism (Alasdair MacIntyre), Abstract Aristotelianism (Martha Nussbaum), Practical Aristotelianism (Hannah Arendt), and Intuitive Aristotelianism (William Galston). Nuanced but significant differences between the projects concern two points: first, the foundation (i.e., what they emphasize in Aristotle), and second, the results (i.e., how they extend and apply Aristotle’s position).
Contemporary Aristotelians suggest that there is something about Aristotle’s perspective that is necessary to understand the world. Why? Aristotle’s first and most crucial contribution is his portrayal of human beings as political creatures – that is, his argument for the primacy of politics for human fulfillment. Second, and only slightly less crucial, is Aristotle’s portrayal and defense of human excellence. Although they reach diverse conclusions, contemporary Aristotelians all rely on these two unique contributions. In addition, contemporary Aristotelians also exhort fellow philosophers to recognize Aristotle as essential to comprehensive moral-political theories. Around these two points, we might reconcile contemporary versions of Aristotelianism.
Differences in what they take from Aristotle, however, overshadow this common ground. These differences lead to stronger and weaker versions of Aristotelianism, some providing a robust defense of Aristotle’s role in improving moral-political theory and others diminishing their own attempts to appropriate Aristotle by distending his commitments. In different ways, Modified and Intuitive Aristotelianism provide 1) the most decisive arguments for Aristotle’s pivotal role in contemporary political theory and 2) the most well-developed application of Aristotle’s insights to moral-political questions. Despite renewed interest in his thought, Aristotle’s insights are lost in a haze of competing arguments. By identifying the most defensible versions of contemporary Aristotelianism, scholars can reclaim those insights and work toward applying them to current circumstances. | en |
