  |
|
|
|
Magnanimity and PoliticsIts History and Relevance for Today's Politics
As an idea in political thought, magnanimity implicates a fundamental way of life and politics. Here is a history of this ancient concept and its relevance for politics.
As one of the most influential documents designed in the 18th century, the Declaration of Independence not only makes the case for the separation of the colonies from Great Britain but includes an overall theory of limited government. It also includes appeals to rulers in Great Britain, including an appeal to "their native justice and magnanimity.” While magnanimity has its origins in ancient thought it remains relevant within politics. HistoryThe word itself comes from the ancient Greek megalopsuchia, also translated as ‘greatness of soul.’ (Liddell and Scott, 491). The first systematic study of magnanimity arises in Aristotle and his work Nicomachean Ethics. (A later version arises within St. Thomas Aquinas' Summa Theologica.) The Ethics describes the way by which people achieve happiness through right living. In particular, man achieves his highest purpose as man by using his highest faculty—his reason—and living according to certain virtues of character acquired through habit. The best person will be (among other things) brave, temperate, friendly, mild and generous, each virtue a mean between two deficient ways of acting. As Aristotle describes in Book IV of his work, such a person “thinks himself worthy of great things and is really worth of them.” (3.§3) Such a person is neither vain—“thinks he is worthy of great things, but is not worthy of them”—nor pusillanimous—“thinks he is worthy of less than he is worthy of” (3.§§6-7). This “best person” among people holds all the proper virtues such as acting in a brave (not cowardly, rash or fearless) way; due to his magnanimity he “makes [the virtues] greater” and heightens them. Concerned “especially with honors and dishonors,” (3.§17), he will only accept honors from “excellent people” and in a moderate way and will not care too much about “good fortune [or] ill fortune” (3.§§17-18). All the same, he cares little about honor and thus “seems arrogant” (3.§18). Such a man gives more than receives good and is “ashamed” to receive good, and will act in a great way when danger occurs but only for “a great cause” (3.§§ 23,25, 27). He also does not care about “gossip” or hearing “himself praised or other people blamed” though he speaks and acts freely and is “open in his hatreds and his friendships” since he cares more about the truth than what other people think about him (3.§§25, 28, 30-31). And, due to his stature of greatness he acts as though the world works at his pace. Magnanimity and PoliticsOn a collective level magnanimity leads people toward their more virtuous impulses and in particular a call toward individual greatness. While few achieve such magnanimity, it can lead many to notice and appreciate such greatness. It also holds out the hope that truly great, virtuous people exist and can benefit themselves and others by living this way. In times of greatest danger, heroes will emerge. However, it has its potential dangers in a democratic age: true lovers of equality (the essence of democracy, according to Alexis de Tocqueville) are likely to resent magnanimity and its judgment of inferior people. Others might find Aristotle's character education an exercise in futility (too difficult for children) or squashing individuality for requiring one fundamental way of life--living according to Aristotle's virtues. Sources:Liddell, H.G., and Scott. 1999 [1899]. An Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon. New York: Oxford University Press. Aristotle. Nicomachean Ethics. Trans. Terence Irwin, 2nd edition. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing. 1999.
The copyright of the article Magnanimity and Politics in Political Philosophy is owned by John Francis Ryan. Permission to republish Magnanimity and Politics in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.
|
|
|
|
