Final answer:
The statement is a philosophical assertion articulating the view that human beings are inherently social creatures, and only those who are self-sufficient or above society's needs can live completely independently -- essentially 'beasts or gods.' It's intended to provoke thought on human sociability and is not a true or false fact.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement 'He who is unable to live in society or who has no need because he is sufficient for himself must be either a beast or a god' is not an objectively true or false statement; rather, it is a philosophical assertion reflecting on human nature and sociability. Aristotle famously said something similar in his work 'Politics', where he argued that man is by nature a social animal and those who do not need to partake in society are either beasts or gods due to their self-sufficiency or superiority. This thought is based on the premise that human beings are inherently social creatures and depend on each other for survival and fulfillment.
Philosophical statements like this are intended to provoke thought and discussion rather than to function as factually true or false claims. They reflect on the human condition, society, and individual capabilities. In the context of education, it serves as a point of reflection in disciplines such as philosophy, ethics, and social studies.