The concepts of constitutional order (politeia) and justice (dike) in Ancient Greek philosophy

This thesis aims to track the concepts of justice and constitutional order which constitute the center of political discussions of the present day- in the Ancient Greek world, in which they are assumed to have first appeared, as well as revealing historical and intellectual conditions in which the validity of these assumptions could be questioned. It is obvious that relevant sociological and historical conditions and the forms of government applied had crucial impact in the formation of the spirit behind the concepts of justice (dike) and constitutional order (politeia) in the ancient Greek world. The practice of revealing how these concepts were shaped with the influence of the relevant sociological conditions falls into the field of historiography. Since historiography always acts with today's questions and concerns, understanding the findings of this practice is actually understanding the present day as well as the facts that lead us to history. This study concentrates on how these two concepts differed from one another in different ancient Greek sites, and how they were defined and shaped by prominent philosophers, by Aristotle and Plato in particular. In other words, the primary concern of this research is not to define what justice and constitutional order are in general, but rather to focus on what these concepts refer to in ancient Greek polis and particularly in the philosophy of Aristotle and Plato. To this end, the first part of the study is spared for the etymological analysis of the concepts of dike and politeia, while the second part focuses on how different forms of government such as monarchy, democracy, aristocracy and oligarchy emerged as options under different sociological conditions and philosophical approaches in the ancient Greek world. Besides, a separate section is spared for the case of Athens as a political and cultural center of this experience, and the evolution of the process towards legalization is elucidated. In the third chapter, the views of Plato and Aristotle, who represent the idealist and realist perspective in politics respectively, on "justice" and "politeia" are examined. Politics always emerge as a field of tension between idealism and realism. In this vein, the views Plato and Aristotle are particularly analyzed in a separate section because they are regarded as prevailing representatives of this dichotomy (i.e. idealism vis- à-vis realism) in philosophy.