upon the first-mentioned conception of “nature”—as the primitive state of things. “Interest is not a primitive institution, and therefore it is unnatural.” The very opposite of this conclusion would be thought true nowadays. We feel now that money unspent “naturally” acquires interest and compound interest, and that in a civilised community nothing is more unnatural than the “talent laid up in a napkin.”
An enthusiastic and almost mystical spirit exhibits itself in Aristotle when he discourses on the Ideal State. Having laid it down that Happiness for the state and for the individual is one and the same (‘Pol.’ VII. ii. 1), he seems for a moment to waver and hesitate as to whether he should not retract the doctrine expressed in the ‘Ethics’ (see above, p. 102), that the happiness to be found in a life of thought is incomparably superior to that to be found in a life of action. Could this be said of a state—that is, of a whole community? If a whole community is engaged in the fruition of philosophical thought, must they not be isolated from international relations and cut off from the world? But Aristotle does not flinch ultimately from the results of his doctrine. He says (‘Pol.’ VII. ii. 16) that “it is quite possible that a state may be situated in some isolated position,” enjoying good laws and knowing nothing of war or foreign relations, and that in such a state (VII. iii. 8) the community may be engaged in contemplations and thoughts which have their own end in themselves, and do not aim at any external results. As is the life of God or of the conscious universe (each
