Sulla definizione di cittadino nel libro III della Politica: il metodo di Aristotele tra theoria, empeiria e storia delle praxeis

Any attempt to grasp Aristotle’s definition of the citizen in Book III of the Politics necessarily entails reflection on the method of his inquiry. It is method that Aristotle adopts within the domain of political science, and which he accordingly employs when his investigation turns to the citizen as the minimal unit of the city. What deserves particular emphasis is how Aristotle establishes with precision both the object of his inquiry—the polis conceived as a multitude of citizens—and its ultimate purpose: the identification of those who bear political responsibility and exercise sovereign power. The present analysis contends that Aristotle’s treatment cannot be fragmented: the definition of citizenship must be understood within the theoretical framework that hosts it, inseparably bound to the discussion of political responsibility and the sovereignty of citizens. Aristotle takes as his point of departure a contemporary political debate concerning who assumes responsibility for praxeis in the polis, and through this concrete framework develops his theoretical reflection. Close examination reveals the seamless interaction between theoria and empeiria in Aristotle’s procedure: the definition formulated in Chapter 1 undergoes continuous verification through the empirical data and historical cases examined in Chapter 2, notably including practices of colonization and naturalization. The citizen in the unqualified sense (haplos) is defined by the faculty (exousia) of exercising deliberative and judicial functions—functions which qualify participation in the sovereign body (kyrion) of the politeia. This definition retains its validity across different constitutional forms, thereby demonstrating Aristotle’s commitment to grounding theoretical analysis in the observation of actual poleis and their historical praxeis. The article highlights Aristotle’s commitment to maintaining a rigorous interplay between theoretical reflection (theoria) and empirical observation (empeiria), consistent with the scientific method (methodos) articulated elsewhere in his corpus. In the initial chapters of Book III, Aristotle elaborates and empirically tests his theoretical definition of the citizen, confronting it with historical practices such as the foundation of colonies and processes of naturalization. While some modern scholarship underscores a tension between Aristotle’s theoretical framework and actual civic practices, this article proposes an alternative reading: it argues that Aristotle advances a coherent and structured discourse in which theory and praxis interact purposefully to substantiate the definition of the citizen. Ultimately, the study contends that Aristotle’s account must be interpreted within the concrete political debates and realities that inform his theoretical project.