Melians Argument Analysis

to "invoke what is fair and right” and to allow them to remain neutral, declaring it unfair for the Athenians to want to force their rule over them. The Athenians, however, cared very little about their ethical and seemingly rational prepositions. Despite the Melians’ argument for fairness and righteousness, the Athenians responded: “you know as well as we do that right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.” Here, Thucydides effectively captured how human nature’s desire for power is able to undermine any ethical action because at the end of the day, all the Athenians cared about was the maintaining and gaining of power. This is even more clear when the Athenians state, “your hostility cannot so much hurt us as your friendship will be an argument to our subjects of our weakness, and your enmity of our power.” Experienced at first hand, Thucydides concluded that the natural forces of power and self-interest rule in the realm of politics, and thus, ethical action and deliberation just don’t have a place in it. Although similar, Weber didn’t interpret his view on human nature as explicitly as Thucydides. Nevertheless, through his overall view of politics and of a state’s collective nature, one can identify his pessimistic view of human nature and capture his rejection of ethical action within the realm of politics. Like Thucydides, Weber perceived politics as the gaining and maintaining of power. This can be captured through his proposed definition of states and of politics. To start, he defines a state as being the constant cycle of man dominating man “striving to share power or striving to influence the distribution of power.” By emphasizing power as a significant element of a state, one can identify his belief in people’s natural desire for power which can ultimately be linked to Thucydides’ view. He therefore suggested that those involved in politics strive for power as a means “in serving other aims, ideal or egoistic, or as 'power for power's sake’.” Evidently, Weber believed that just like humans, the realm of politics was strictly governed by the desire for power. Furthermore, Weber applied his view of the natural struggle for power onto his overall view of a state and its collective nature. According to weber, “a state is a human community that (successfully) claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory.” Recognizing the constant struggle for power, Weber deems it necessary for a state to use physical force upon its subjects in order to restrain their human nature. By analyzing his emphasis of force as an important component of a state, one can argue that Weber deemed human beings as incapable of living together without the intervention of physical force by their rulers. Clearly, Weber’s suggestion of physical force being a necessary element of a state is open to objection: does a state really have to use force to maintain its overall stability? Weber had no doubt that physical force was necessary to the stability of a state, and thus, one can infer that this view serves as another reflection of his view on human nature. Weber believed that human beings were incapable of maintaining a strong state without the presence …show more content…
Without implementing ethical action that encouraged important virtues such as the virtue of peace, states are bound to make decisions that generate war and chaos. Clearly, chaotic and war-like environments no longer allow people to focus on the development of their full potential, and Kant argued that this is why people ultimately seek to avoid such environments. Through the use of reason, Kant argued that it becomes clear to people that states of war and chaos go against their drive towards progress. Thus, this is where ethical action plays a key role in politics. The implementation of ethical action in politics ensures the political stability of a state, which ultimately nurtures an environment in which human progress can actually take place in. This clearly comforts to people’s natural desire for progress, and thus it is in people’s best interest to implement ethical action into politics so that they can avoid any possibility of war and