Political Philosophy, Whole, Parts

The primary aim of a Political Philosophy is to posit the best Polis, from which the best means to that end is derived.  In contrast, Political Theory and Political Science classify and compare various means that have appeared.  Now, Aristotle seems inconsistent in conducting this enterprise.  For, even though he asserts that the Whole is prior to the Parts, in much of what follows, the Whole is a means to the Good of its Parts, e. g. when suggesting that the end of a Constitition is the cultivation of the Virtue in its citizenry.  In other words, he does not seem to define the Highest Good of a Whole qua Whole.  But, the inconsistency stems not from a failure to subordinate the Parts to the Whole; rather, it is from his opposing Whole and Part to begin with.  Instead, a Whole is a Whole of its Parts, so that the Good of the Whole is the Good of its Parts.  On that basis, the best Polis is one constituted by the optimal functioning of all its Parts, with the best system that which is an effective means to that end.  That the actualization of such a Polis is highly unlikely is not equivalent to its impossibility, and its mere possibility has value as a corrective to the pretensions of contingent inferior systems to inherent necessity, e. g. the prominent thesis that a 'state of Nature' is a condition of universal war.