I will also argue that the city is a utopia. Mary Nichols, for example, argues that “its full flourishing is impossible” due largely to the unresolvable tension between political rule and despotism. very improbable that it could come into being and equally improbable that it could be sustained very long if it did.

Due to such short-comings, some scholars have suggested that the city, despite its seeming real plausibility compared to Plato’s Republic, is ultimately just as utopian, i.e.

It is unclear whether it allows for philosophy, or how many, if any, of its citizens would be philosophers. It seeks self-sufficiency but ultimately still needs other cities. It requires conventional slavery, which Aristotle had earlier argued is unjust. Scholars have indicated problems with Aristotle’s ideal regime discussed in books seven and eight of his Politics. I do so by comparing his ideal regime to his prior discussions of democracy in the earlier books of the Politics and in particular what he considered the best type of democracy.

Similarly, I argue that carefully considered his ideal regime turns-out not to be feasible or a practical recommendation for politics, but rather a thought experiment like Plato’s Republic meant to show the limitations of what is politically achievable. Presented at the Southwest Political Science Conference, Las Vegas, March 2016Īlthough Aristotle’s ideal regime discussed in books seven and eight of his Politics seems much more feasible and less utopian than the regime outlined in Plato’s Republic, a few scholars have questioned its feasiblity in light of the real world demands of politics.

Aristotle republic