Recognition and Redistribution in Aristotle’s Account of Stasis

Douglas Cairns,Kleanthis Mantzouranis,Mirko Canevaro

doi:10.1163/20512996-12340354

Douglas Cairns, Kleanthis Mantzouranis + Show 1 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1163/20512996-12340354

Copy DOI

Abstract

Abstract In Politics 5.1–3, Aristotle sees different conceptions of proportional equality and justice as the fundamental causes of stasis and metabolē (constitutional change). His account shows what happens to notions of ‘particular’ justice when they become causes of individual and collective action in pursuit of moral and political revolution. The whole discussion of the causes of stasis should be read through the filter of individual/group motivation – as a reflection of what goes on in the heads of those who engage in stasis. Movements towards political change are motivated by ingrained conceptions of proportional equality and fair distribution of honour and wealth. Aristotle’s approach, therefore, may be compared to Axel Honneth’s, that social justice should be seen in terms of the distribution of dignity and respect as well as of material resources.

Highlights

One of the most thought-provoking philosophical debates of the last two decades has been that between Nancy Fraser and Axel Honneth on the concepts of redistribution and recognition.[1]
In Honneth’s formulation, the key categories in play are not distributive and economic equality but rather equality of dignity and respect.[2]. These developments have been linked to the rise of identity politics and the realignment of left-wing political theory, from socialism to liberalism. Against these developments, which she associates with Charles Taylor and Axel Honneth, the two most prominent theorists of recognition, Nancy Fraser has reaffirmed the centrality of ‘redistribution’, arguing that struggles concerning redistribution are qualitatively different from those over recognition and cannot be reduced to them; she argues, the new centrality of recognition has side-lined concerns with equality that should instead still be at the centre of the left-wing political agenda
We proceed to analyse in detail the argument of Politics 5.1–3: we argue that Aristotle sees different conceptions of proportional equality and justice (‘in accordance with worth’) as the fundamental causes of stasis and metabolē, and we show what happens to notions of ‘particular’ justice when they are no longer standalone concepts

Summary

Introduction

One of the most thought-provoking philosophical debates of the last two decades has been that between Nancy Fraser and Axel Honneth on the concepts of redistribution and recognition.[1]. Aristotle’s argument is valuable for two reasons It anticipates modern work on the importance of unpacking the orders of recognition and theories of value underpinning the distribution of wealth, income, and respect in modern society, as highlighted by Honneth, and, for instance, in recent work on capitalism and inequality by Mariana Mazzucato.[6] Second, it puts into stark relief how abstract notions such as ‘numerical equality’ per se never serve as grounds for moral and political struggles, and never succeed per se in motivating political and social agents to undertake these struggles. It undermines accounts such as that of Ryan Balot that read the dispositional cause of stasis (a particular notion of proportional equality) as a pretext (a foil used by revolutionaries), the fundamental (final) cause of stasis being material gain.[10]

The Context of the Argument

Those Who στασιάζουσιν

Conclusions