Diego Pérez de Mesa’s ‘Política o razón de Estado’ and the Medieval Commentary Tradition on Aristotle’s Politics
The work "Politics or Reason of State taken from Aristotle", written by Diego Pérez de Mesa, is not only based to a great extent on Aristotle's Politics, as its title openly acknowledges, but also on the most influential medieval commentary on politics, that is, the commentary initiat...
Guardado en:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Artículo publishedVersion |
| Lenguaje: | Inglés |
| Publicado: |
Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Universidad de Buenos Aires
2017
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://revistascientificas.filo.uba.ar/index.php/petm/article/view/7383 https://repositoriouba.sisbi.uba.ar/gsdl/cgi-bin/library.cgi?a=d&c=patris&d=7383_oai |
| Aporte de: |
| Sumario: | The work "Politics or Reason of State taken from Aristotle", written by Diego Pérez de Mesa, is not only based to a great extent on Aristotle's Politics, as its title openly acknowledges, but also on the most influential medieval commentary on politics, that is, the commentary initiated by Thomas Aquinas and completed by Pedro de Auvernia, something, by the way, that Pérez de Mesa no longer acknowledges. In this article I show the different ways in which Pérez de Mesa bases this commentary: sometimes he reproduces it textually or takes lines of reasoning from it, while on other occasions he criticizes it, particularly with regard to the scheme that the commentary offers about the ideal ruler. For Pérez de Mesa, the ideal ruler has its origin in the unity formed between the ruler and the Council of State and there must be regency according to the law, and not, as Pedro de Auvergne had maintained, according to the ruler's own will and intellect. Despite Pérez de Mesa's criticism of Pierre d'Auvergne's representation of the perfect ruler, it is remarkable that a treatise on the reason of state is so strongly based on an Aristotelian medieval commentary. The link between the reason of state and the end of "Political Aristotelianism" must be rectified. |
|---|