Philosophy of Antiquity

There is a lurking sense that the state system is under attack or is simply withering away. The world is simultaneously coming together and falling apart. This book looks at current definitions of sovereignty and theories of systems change. Much of our inability to explain change in our current state system stems from using poorly conceived concepts. the cases together we will draw out the key points for a comprehensive theory of sovereignty and systems change. Systems change has challenged scholars for some time now. Yet there is still at it's a core progressive research program at work. Over time scholars have laid out the basic set of relationships that exist between competing social systems and the variations in the international system that often occur. For long periods of time, stable sovereign principles structure the international system and create various international orders. When that equilibrium does break and the types of units proliferate numerous scholars have provided fairly clear, if not contradictory, explanations for why one unit will tend to prevail over competing units. The biggest gap in the literature was proving that some relationship between the competing social systems, the various polities, and the international order existed and that these variations could be predictable. By filling in this gap we have been able to address the two central questions of this book: when will systems change occur and what unit types are likely to form in any given circumstance? A new full, revised version as an additional analysis for the comparative study of ancient civilizations.

Through hundreds of years of research, the studies on the Greco-Roman world with China have reached a high level, and many publications can be found everywhere. This result reflects the high concern of scholars for communications between the West and the East. Nowadays, following the quick development of globalization, China is inevitably getting involved in international relations. Under these circumstances, for both Western countries and China, how to communicate with each other on an international level is a vital question that needs prompt answers. Since there are frequent and close communications between Europe and China today, these relations constitute a prominent issue from the perspective of economy, culture, politics, and diplomacy. The relations between the Roman empire and ancient China, as an early example for communications between the West and East, play a key role in European-Chinese relations. A better understanding of these relations in history will be of crucial importance for contemporary international relations. Therefore, based on the contributions of the previous researchers and the valuable ancient Chinese literature, this book will deal with the relations between the Roman empire and ancient China, with a focus on the study of the image of the Roman empire (Da-qin) in ancient Chinese literature. Compared with Western sources, with the help of Chinese sources, the book will attempt to reconstruct the image, analyze the influential factors of the image's construction, and examine its significance for contemporary international relations, especially for the improvement of contemporary European-Chinese relations. A new full, revised version as an additional analysis for the comparative study of ancient civilizations.

Ethics is concerned with evaluating different ways of life in order to discern the best possible life. The best possible life seems to be completely opposite to the style of life advocated by Foucault. The best possible life is one in which the individual identifies with perfectly ordered power, not with will-to-power. Ancient Greek and Indian philosophy take different perspectives of the philosophy of life, but a synthesis of similarities between Greek-Western and Indian philosophy is becoming crucial to understand the perplexity of human life. A new full, revised version as an additional analysis for the comparative study of ancient civilizations.

Pluralism is an important philosophical alternative to relativism and absolutism. Although Plato is often construed as a philosophical absolutist, we think our understanding of him as such must be tempered by viewing him through the Confucian lens. Similarly, in the case of Aristotle, his position seems somewhat less logos-driven when approached from a Chinese perspective. Instead, his emphasis on practical wisdom,navigating the world while attentive to the particular situation at hand, emerges into the foreground. Along the way, we speculate about possible contemporary applications of these philosophical views. Should certain modes or uses of language be privileged over others, or does a healthy community attempt to incorporate them all? We argue that Western and Eastern philosophers share at least some commitment to pluralism, and further that this means they would resist the permeation of economic vocabulary into our modem discourses. With both the Greeks and the Chinese, the movement towards clarity and certainty with respect to their ideas has resulted in what appears as some semblance of dogmatism, when in fact they all recognized ultimately that the ongoing challenges posed by the intricacies of human conversation and community constitution are never fully conquered. Ultimately, the point is not that Plato and Aristotle fail to offer us anything resembling the Confucian emphasis on zhengming. Nor is it that this is precisely what they offer. By examining this salient dimension of Confucian thought, we must exercise our philosophical imagination to make sense of what is otherwise easily misconstrued. We are also prompted to interrogate and become more cognizant of our own intellectual heritage in the process. In so doing, we are afforded a fresh perspective from which to derive insight into our own philosophical views. We may even come away with novel and more effective ways of living and speaking with each other in the world. A new full, revised version as an additional analysis for the comparative study of ancient civilizations.

Aristotle acknowledges that the different views regarding the most appropriate form of government stem from the different priority that various men, or groups of men, give to the different values. The primary political dispute is whether freedom, wealth, power, or moral virtue, should be considered as the primary value for judging equality. In order to interpret Aristotle's egalitarian and participatory understanding of the political, we need to examine his analysis of the various constitutions. Moreover, we need to examine and analyze Aristotle's views regarding a number of central issues–, such as the definition of the citizens and the non-citizens, the importance of unity, the role of property, and the meaning of justice, that provide the basis for the development of his understanding of the political. A new analysis for the study of classical ancient, Aristotelian philosophy.

There are some issues that are very crucial for a proper understanding of the political. The issue of the equality or inequality of possessions, and the extent of this inequality; the organization of the territory and of the citizen body; and the change of the laws, are among the most important. At the same time, the way a thinker deals with these issues reveals a lot of things about his understanding of the political; his ideas of the way a society or a polis should be organized and governed; and his affinities with the one or the other constitutional way of organizing a polis. Aristotle deals with the above issues in his most characteristic way: by using his endoxic method. A new analysis for the study of classical ancient, Aristotelian philosophy.

While reading Aristotle's analysis of the various constitutions in the third book of the Politics, a discussion that took place at a distant past comes to mind. It is the discussion among Megillus of Lacedaemon, Clinias of Crete, and an Athenian Stranger, during a walk from Cnosus to the cave and temple of Zeus on Mount Ida, "on a long midsummer day". This walk is narrated in Plato's Laws. It seems that Aristotle is reflecting on the part of the discussion that occupies the fourth book of the Laws, and comes up with his own analysis and classification of the various constitutions. I believe therefore that it is important to examine some parts of Plato's Laws, before embarking upon the interpretation of Aristotle's own analysis. We can assume that the happiness refers to the polis as a whole, but also to its constituent parts, its citizens. The Athenian Stranger narrates a story of a polis which was ruled under the providence of the God. In the context of this story he presents the necessary preconditions that a constitution should meet so that the polis can achieve its primary goals: to provide peace (as a result of lack of factions within the polis) and happiness. We see that for Plato, if we consider the Athenian Stranger to be a spokesman for Plato, the lawgiver should establish laws that would enable the citizens of the polis to live in a peaceful environment, where justice and good laws prevail, and would cultivate modesty in them. The Athenian Stranger is very strict about the use of the term "constitution". He holds the view that the most of the so-called constitutions should not even be called as such. He believes that tyranny, monarchy, oligarchy, aristocracy, and democracy should not be considered as constitutions, because they divide the polis into two parts, the ruling and the ruled. A new analysis for the study of classical ancient, Aristotelian philosophy.

For Aristotle, a constitution should be named as a democratic one when the sovereign body of the polis is consisted of the free men who are not wealthy, and these men are the majority. We see that Aristotle links democracy with the rule of the poor. He emphasizes that the rule of the poor is the distinctive element of democracy, and not the rule of the many. It is central to Aristotle that there is not only one but a number of different kinds of democracy, and it is important for him to reveal their differences and categorize them. These variances are also evident into all the existent constitutional frameworks. A new analysis for the study of classical ancient, Aristotelian philosophy.