sufficing. The State, though later in time than the family, is prior to it, and even to the individual,
by nature; for "what each thing is when fully developed we call its nature," and human society,
fully developed, is a State, and the whole is prior to the part. The conception involved here is that
of organism: a hand, when the body is destroyed, is, we are told, no longer a hand. The
implication is that a hand is to be defined by its purpose--that of grasping--which it can only
perform when joined to a living body. In like manner, an individual cannot fulfil his purpose
unless he is part of a State. He who founded the State, Aristotle says, was the greatest of
benefactors; for without law man is the worst of animals, and law depends, for its existence, on
the State. The State is not a mere society for exchange and the prevention of crime: "The end of
the State is the good life.... And the State is the union of families and villages in a perfect and
self-sufficing life, by which we mean a happy and honourable life" ( 1280b). "A political society
exists for the sake of noble actions, not of mere companionship" ( 1281a).
A State being composed of households, each of which consists of one family, the discussion of
politics should begin with the family. The bulk of this discussion is concerned with slavery--for in
antiquity the slaves were always reckoned as part of the family. Slavery is expedient and right, but
the slave should be naturally inferior to the master. From birth, some are marked out for
subjection, others for rule; the man who is by nature not his own but another man's is by nature a
slave. Slaves should not be Greeks, but of an inferior race with less spirit ( 1255a, and 1330a).
Tame animals are better off when ruled by man, and so are those who are naturally inferior when
ruled by their superiors. It may be questioned whether the practice of making slaves out of
prisoners of war is justified; power, such as leads to victory in war, seems to imply superior virtue,
but this is not always the case. War, however, is just when waged against men who, though
intended by nature to be governed, will not submit ( 1256b); and in this case, it is implied, it
would be right to make slaves of the conquered. This would seem enough to justify any conqueror
who ever lived; for no nation will admit that it is intended by nature to be governed, and the only
evidence as to nature's intentions must be derived from the outcome of war. In every war,
therefore, the victors are in the right and the vanquished in the wrong. Very satisfactory!