Cicero+Study+questions

(Add, answer, and discuss study questions for this author and reading) In two main points both views are very similar: humans are sociable and the distinction of three regimes (monarchy, aristocracy and “popular regime”). But Cicero’s conception of political community is more realistic than Aristotle’s view. Even a mixed regime is really close from reality (the vision of Scipio will come true, because Rome will be the first city empire to have a mixed regime. According to Polybius, Rome is powerful because of its mixed regime). Otherwise, in any case Scipio talks about a “best regime” ruled by gods or semi-gods. And Cicero’s point of view is more based in the law: Scipio says that a political community is a group of people who agree to be together by laws. There is no community without laws.
 * **Are there any differences between Cicero's conception of the political community and Aristotle's?**

Cicero's argument for loyalty to the republic in //On Duties// is similar to Aristotle's naturalistic explanation of the polis. Both writers build the units of society up from the nuclear family, through the extended family and economic community, to culminate in their individual conceptions of a good form of governance. For Cicero, this is the republic, which "embraces the affections of all of us" (//On Duties//, 1.57). This is not far removed from Aristotle's argument that the polis is the necessary government to ensure a virtuous life for its citizenry.

Cicero points out that even if the best forms of rule are aristocracy and monarchy, they can easily be corrupted as like Aristotle the value of either regime is dependant entirely on the virtue of its members. The people make the 'common error' of seeing virtue as equivelent to wealth and property, the leaders themselves cling to the title of 'best men' that they have given themselves. "//There is no uglier state than that in which the richest are thought to be best//" (Republic 1.52). This is very similar to Aristotle's conception that wealth itself is not an ends but a tool. Scipio says that the best form of rule would be a mixture of monarchy, aristocracy and rule by the people. The next best, and more practical/realistic form is monarchy.
 * **What are the differences (if any) between Aristotle's and Cicero's arguments concerning the best form of rule?**

Scipio also says that "the nature of any common wealth corresponds to the nature or the desires of its ruling power." ([49]) If Scipio is the voice of Cicero, which it is not clear that this is true, then he is arguing that the common wealth is more or less defined by the ruling power. This leads me to believe that Cicero, like the Stoics, sees the common wealth or the "good life" as something that is different for various peoples and governments. It is in the nature of the authority to define the common wealth. Aristotle would greatly contest this view. From Aristotle's views, he believes that there are many routes to the "good life" but only one uniform goal. All routes should lead to the same end, the "good life."


 * Is this really more realistic? What does Scipio really say at the end of the first book of the De republica? What is an example of the mixed regime? 1217371981**. He uses examples such as a single person being head of a household to prove that one person in charge is best. Cicero would prefer an aristocracy or a monarchy for similar reasons to Aristotle; //'Equity itself is highly inequitable' (Republic 1.53).// Virtuous people should recognise those with the best traits suited to rule and should be elevatate to the position (if it doesn't occur naturally) as to do anything less would be worse. Similarly, he states that if a job can be done entirely by one, there is no need for more than one. However on the other hand each form of government can easily undermine itself and lead to extremes, so a mixed regime with //'something oustanding and monarchal, something else to the authority of aristocrats, and some things left aside for the judgement of the people//' (//Republic// 1.69) seems best. Unsuprisingly, this sounds curiously similar to the Roman republican system. The Aristocracy runs Rome, though elects two consuls/'kings', or a dictator in times of crisis (an aspect of something Monarchal), but the mob as well have a say through the voice and veto of the Tribune of the Plebs.
 * **Why according to Cicero is there honour in virtue as shown by the respect of fellow citizens? (In the text book)**

Cicero felt that the strongest and most important relationship between men of good character was one born of familiarity. He argues that good virtues (justice and liberality especially) are honourable qualities that draw men to men that posess them. He further states that friendship and fellowship are utmost when men pursue the same common good objectives. What he means by all this is that when men strive to achieve a common and joint goal their relations will be cemented by familiarity and similar purpose. And when the men are bonded to each other in this fashion they will see the good deeds commited by others and they will admire, appreciate and honor those persons.

Cicero states that as Plato said: "//we were not born for ourselves alone//" (De Officiis 1.7), our country, friends, and family all claim a 'share' in our being. Men "//are born for the sake of men//" and assisting one another is our duty. However our obligations to other still are ordered by priority: Although we are universally connected by our human bond, we do not hold the same obligations to those not included in the above categories (1.17). Cicero suggests that all should adopt of policy of at least being able to give that which costs the giver nothing to anyone (De Officiis 1.16.51)
 * **Do we have obligations to people outside our state, according to Cicero? How strong are these?**
 * Our country and parents (they have given us our lives)
 * Our children and family (they depend on us for support and protection)
 * Our Kinsmen (we live and work with them to achieve similar goals)


 * **Can our obligations to family and political community for example, conflict?**
 * **Does Cicero think the expansion of Rome has been based on justice?**
 * No, Roman rule in Marseilles is based on an aristocracy alone, a situation that Scipio does not agree as the correct form of government. I suppose that the next question is whether Barbarians (based on manners) deserve the same rule as civilised Romans.

Cicero believes that conflicts between states should be resolved through rational discussion, if at all possible, as this is a "characteristic of man." The only cause for the use of force is if this discussion fails, and a state must act in order "that we may live in peace unharmed" (De Officias 1.11.35). Even through the use of this force, however, Cicero believes in mercy and justice towards the enemy. Promises toward the enemy must be kept and protection must be provided for those combatants who surrender in battle. In order for a war to be "just," the necessary legal procedures authorizing such a war the state must be followed and a clear declaration must be made to the enemy.
 * **Does Cicero have a conception of just war?**