funnily enough, Aristotle said people captured in war as slaves were not true slaves, had the legal right to sue for freedom and that slaves were born slaves. H

funnily enough, Aristotle said people captured in war as slaves were not true slaves, had the legal right to sue for freedom and that slaves were born slaves. He was completely against might makes right. edit - also, his views on slavery somewhat stretch the definition of what we and most of his contemporaries would necessarily regard as slavery. This being Aristotle. He is still really just excusing the slavery of his time however. He states: "all are not either slaves by nature or freemen by nature, and also that there is in some cases a marked distinction between the two classes, rendering it expedient and right for the one to be slaves and the others to be masters: the one practicing obedience, the others exercising the authority and lordship which nature intended them to have. The abuse of this authority is injurious to both; for the interests of part and whole, of body and soul, are the same, and the slave is a part of the master, a living but separated part of his bodily frame. Hence, where the relation of master and slave between them is natural they are friends and have a common interest, but where it rests merely on law and force the reverse is true." and also: "And again, no one would ever say he is a slave who is unworthy to be a slave." This would suggest that the easiest way to not be Aristotle's slave would be to tell him to sod off and do his own cleaning, though I suspect the reality may have been different.