within the whole society), HIERARCHY(distinct ranks
in family, economy, and politics), and PARTICIPATION
(active involvement in governing). A classic example
of this is Aristotle’s statement that “man is by nature a
social and political animal” by virtue of his unique
human faculties of “reasoned speech and moral
choice” (which cannot be used or developed in isola-
tion). Consequently, the citizen must be prepared
(socially, economically, morally, and politically) to par-
ticipate in the direct rule of the REPUBLIC(polis) and
develop a noble character that knows and practices
justice. This classical Greek emphasis on ethical char-
acter in service of the public good flows directly to the
MEDIEVAL“English gentleman” who is bred to noblesse
oblige and serving the common good.
This “public-spirited” quality of ancient Greek
thought contrasts with the modern LIBERALconcentra-
tion of private interest, selfish PLURALISM, and WELFARE-
STATEviews of politics. Even in later Greek thought
(Zeno the Stoic), the trend was toward “self” realiza-
tion and private concerns, but the enduring nature of
Greek theory is its social view of justice. For the
ancients, politics was to bring out the best in human
nature, not the most sordid, and political service was
to be “the good life” of reason and ethics above the
“mere life” of physical urges and economics. To be
self-centered or obsessed with money was a kind of
slavery to one’s lowest nature, for Aristotle. Humans
reside between the gods and the beasts; political life
fulfills the human’s proper place between contempla-
tion (divine) and biological life (animal). Without
proper training and cultivation of the higher faculties,
humans become worse than beasts. So, it is society’s
responsibility to promote education and virtue in its
citizens. Unlike later Christianity, with its emphasis on
human weakness and sin, classical Greek thought was
confident that people could become truly excellent
(even perfect) through the best education and moral
example. This ancient optimism over human nature is
revived in MODERN ENLIGHTENMENTthought.
Further Readings
Aristotle. The Nicomachean Ethics,H. Rackham, transl. 1934.
Barker, E. From Alexander to Constantine.[An anthology, with
massive commentary on passages and documents, 338 B.C.
to A.D. 337.] Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1966.
Ehrenberg, V. The Greek State,2nd ed. London: Methuen, 1969.
Euripides. The Suppliant Women,F. Jones, transl. 1958.
Finley, M. I. Politics in the Ancient World.Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1983.
———. Democracy Ancient and Modern, 2nd ed. New
Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1985.
Guthrie, W. K. C. “A History of Greek Philosophy,” vol. III, pt.- In The Fifth-Century Enlightenment.Cambridge, Eng.:
Cambridge University Press, 1981.
Kerferd, G. B. The Sophistic Movement.Cambridge, Eng.: Cam-
bridge University Press, 1981.
Nippel, W. Mischverfassungstheorie und Verfassungsrealität in
Antike und früher Neuzeit, pt. 1. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta,
Ober, Josiah. The Athenian Revolution: Essays on Ancient Greek
Democracy and Political Theory.Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell Uni-
versity Press, ca. 1996.
Raaflaub, K. Zum freiheitsbergriff der griechen.In Soziale Typen-
begriffe im alten Griechenland,vol. IV, E. Weskopg, ed.
Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1981.
Vlastos, G. “Isonomia politike” (in English). In Isonomia,J. Mau
and E. G. Schmidt, eds. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1964.
Winton, R. I., and Garnsey, P. “Political theory.” In The Legacy of
Greece,M. I. Finley, ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
Green, Thomas Hill (1836–1882) Liberal re-
formist and philosophical idealist
Thomas Hill Green was an important influence on late
Victorian and early 20th century liberal political
thought. His significance at that time is said to have
superseded John Stuart Mill’s importance. His work is
seldom cited in contemporary debates, although Green
provides an interesting counterpoint to current liberal
orthodoxies.
Green’s first publication was an introductory essay
to an edited volume of Hume’s philosophy, in which
he sets out a lengthy argument against empiricism.
The general framework of this argument is important
because it is applied later to his critique of utilitarian-
ism and the contract tradition of liberalism. First,
Green argues that ideas do not originate in mere sen-
sation. In this, he follows Kant in arguing that ideas
presuppose conceptions such as of causality, time,
space, and so on. Second, Green claimed that concep-
tions and ideas are always in relation to other ideas
and conceptions. This antinominalism, or holism,
allowed the mind to be active and creative in know-
ing, thus constituting reality. This is Green’s idealism.
Green thought of utilitarianism as a moral ana-
logue of empiricism. He argued that a feeling or sen-
sation such as pleasure cannot be the source of moral
goodness. A conception of goodness is required for
pleasure to be takenas good. Furthermore, this con-
ception of goodness arises only in our relations with
others within a common society. Green’s idea of the
good was that of individual self-perfection toward a
Christian end. The idea that individuals can onlyGreen, Thomas Hill 127