This adage is commonly attributed to Frederick Douglass, and reflects an apparent truth that resonates on multiple levels. I will spare readers a dissertation-length discourse and sum up my thoughts referencing the literal and figurative bodies of my reflections in generalities.

Firstly, literal. Consider the Aristotelian thought process surrounding the concept of a “natural slave”. Aristotle, undoubtedly a brilliant and very innovative man, was also inescapably a product of—and sullied by—the pervasive notion of his time that considered certain humans inherently inferior to others. He acknowledged what he perceived to be a natural occurrence in such passages as the following:

“For that some should rule and others be ruled is a thing not only necessary, but expedient; from the hour of their birth, some are marked out for subjection, others for rule…” – Aristotle, Politics

It was this type of mindset, not necessarily colored with selfish intentions—he didn’t own slaves, and saw this social stratification as inborn predisposition rather than a circumstance of convention—that girded his confident attitude concerning matters that many present-day individuals find unconscionable. Aristotle deemed the “barbarians” (read: non-Greek) biologically intended for such a capacity, even likening slaves to a subhuman category referred to as “living tool”, similar to the purpose of tame animals, stating:

“And indeed the use made of slaves and of tame animals is not very different; for both with their bodies minister to the needs of life.” – Aristotle, Politics

I won’t delve any further into his ruminations, as they only slip further into antiquated ignorance. Think, though, about the general acceptance of such inklings: a non-slave sees this as simply “how things are”. Slaves, sans any knowledge to the contrary, would accept their fate as obligatory and even an ordinary “fact” (lot) of life. The latter is manufactured self-damning acquiescence, unknowing forfeiture of mind (mental) and body (physical). This willful complicity recalls a sad, unfortunate statement made by a well-known abolitionist:

“I freed a thousand slaves. I could have freed a thousand more if only they knew they were slaves.” – Harriet Tubman

Second, and also as a corollary to the first point – figurative. The chief reason why a slave was (and is) a slave is by submission of the mind. One cannot rule another’s body without the will of the ruled being in agreement, whether motivated by false impressions of a “natural inheritance” or coerced assent. Departing from the despicable transgression of slavery, unavoidably and forever riddled in unethical implications regardless of one’s artful sophistry, consider the individual who submits to metaphorical forms of slavery.

The idea of a “freethinker” was first articulated by William Clifford in “The Ethics of Belief”. His insights were adjudicated with refreshing intellectual acuity, and summed up his perceptions on what it would take to embody a state of vigil skepticism, to ponder and possess a decision-making competence better attuned to reality, with his noteworthy principle:

“It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence.”

I highly suggest reading Clifford’s essay that is, with good reason, considered the “locus classicus” on the very subject of its title. Clifford’s devotion to substantiation is built upon the foundation of knowledge*, or belief that is justified to a provisional degree by virtue of verifiable, corroborating and consistent data, coinciding with the logic behind the quote, “Knowledge makes a man unfit to be a slave.”

It would be extremely difficult (not to mention clearly ill-fitting) for an individual to allow their mind to remain chained to beliefs that are inconsistent and laughably untenable once one has acquired a certain level of information that disabuses the former conviction or idea propped with unsupported data that, when examined, fatally lacks dependability or is otherwise contrary to the testable, tangible world. This is why Steve Biko, anti-apartheid activist who founded the Black Consciousness Movement, said:

“The most potent weapon in the hands of the oppressor is the mind of the oppressed.”

Not to digress, but En Vogue poetically summed up both truths (Douglass and Biko) with the hook “Free the mind, and the rest will follow”. How right they were. What’s more, and likely even more damning when it comes to the realm of the absence of knowledge, Clifford addresses the act of willful ignorance.

Facing reality when it has potential to contradict–or would, without doubt, categorically refute what we maintain as a cherished belief–takes a certain level of temerity, a degree of humility not everyone is able to countenance. Because of this, as aptly stated in “Philosophy: The Quest for Truth”, there are some that retreat into unreason and obey the commandment of Ignorance, “Think not, lest Thou be confounded!” (pg. 2).

Clifford makes note of such action (rather, purposeful inaction). He notes that one ought not to violate the obligation to gather evidence, remain open to new evidence, and consider the evidence offered by others in relation to propositions believed or could be believed. Clifford characterizes this as, for example, purposely avoiding reading material germane to the belief and evading the company of people who would question the presupposition. Regarding this, a principle that acts as a second-part to the chief principle, Clifford says:

“It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone to ignore evidence that is relevant to his beliefs, or to dismiss relevant evidence in a facile way.”

Humans are very diverse creatures. We are “meant” (either by naturalistic biology or self-prescribed ambitions) to be many things–a slave is not one of them. Truly consider this. This is why apocryphal and revisionist history is commonplace. This is why political discourse is riddled with false dilemmas and sometimes conveniently absent of pertinent information. Such misinformation exists for the express purpose to mislead and to lull one into acceptance of false precepts.

We must endeavor to educate ourselves beyond intuitive conviction, despite how persuasive and appealing. Aristotle was wrong. Nobody is a natural slave: neither in body, nor in mind. We all have the potential to be masters. Do not relinquish your power. Only the competence of achieved knowledge renders one incompetent to play slave to ideas, ideology and the passions of inadequate belief.

*I go into the theory of knowledge in my article, The Peculiar Case of Belief-Disassociation.