Tutorial 11^th December

Room 2: Political Animals

Weeks 1 & 2

Introduction-

In the first week of Room 2 we have looked at the question of what it means, politically, to be human. It introduces Aristotle’s idea of the ‘political animal’; that human beings are special amongst the animals because they have the power of speech; the ability to pronounce on matters of right and wrong. If there is a distinction between the political realm and the rest of nature, then there is a line drawn, which can include and exclude from the political realm.

That line has been drawn differently by different theorists. Jeremy Bentham, in discussing how law should treat different groups, argued that the significant feature of politically relevant creatures was their ability to suffer. Mary Wollstonecroft, in arguing that women should have the same political rights as men, claimed that humanity was clearly distinguished from the animal kingdom by reasoning, virtue and knowledge. Three modern takes on the problem of distinguishing the political/human world from the non-political/natural world were introduced: Fukuyama argued that it is the sum of human characteristics that give us that essential factor X that makes us human; McKibben argues that it is our ability to resist and decide against our ‘natural’ urges; and Gray argued that there is no reason to distinguish humans from other animals.

For this tutorial we worked as a group to fill out the grid below in more detail, ensuring that students understood the different debates in which questions of political humaness might be important-

Thinker	Their understanding of the dividing line	The debate this is relevant to.
Aristotle	Speech and moral judgment/ voice and utility judgment.	What counts as 'political'.
Bentham	The ability to suffer/ inability to suffer.	Who and what should the law cover.
Wollstonecroft	Reason, value and knowledge/ brute animals.	Whether women should be accorded political status.
Fukuyama	Factor X (emergent property of humanness)/ those not genetically human.	Who is accorded moral status.
McKibben	The ability to say ‘enough’/those governed by species instinct.	Whether a techno-optimism is justified.
Gray	There is no distinction, we are all governed by species instinct and it cannot be avoided.	Whether there is any such thing as the ‘progress of humanity’.