Posted under NeoCons & Political Philosophy
“Strauss called this “the crisis of modernity.” The question is whether there is a way of establishing values through reason and philosophical discourse without reverting to religion. His central argument was that classical political philosophy—the Greeks with their emphasis on “natural right,” or nature deciphered by reason as a source of values—had been prematurely rejected by modern philosophy.
…
For example, the grounds of success of the American political experiment is that it has created a set of “positive” values that served as the basis for national identity but were also accessible to people who were not white and Christian or in some way “blood and soil” related to Anglo-Saxon Protestant founders of the country.” ~ Francis Fukuyama
For lack of a better term, the assessment of Leo Strauss is asinine, and Fukuyama is even worse yet. It’s like going from the Dirt Age to the Dung Age – it just keeps getting worse; each successive generation of Straussians is even more ignorant, and bold, than the last. And one asks himself: Can it possibly get any worse than Bill Kristol, Jaffa or Andrew “Bareback” Sullivan? I hope not. But since the students of Strauss are not worth mentioning, much less the students of students, let’s address the great charlatan himself.
Strauss uses “classical political philosophy” as a backdrop upon which he superimposes a modernist notion of “natural right.” The real Greeks, with their ethnocentrism and blood and soil bonds, would have had no idea what Strauss is talking about. And once they figured out his intention, namely erasing the real West and replacing it with liberal abstract platitudes, they would have bought him a one-way ticket back to Asia.
DanPhillips on 15 May 2007 at 3:17 am #
“The question is whether there is a way of establishing values through reason and philosophical discourse without reverting to religion.”
That is in fact the question and the answer is no. Much can be determined through the natural revelation. Such as the self-evident truth that there is a Creator. But Truth comes ultimately through Revelation. This is the pre-Enlightenment view that dominated in the Christian West.
Filmer on 15 May 2007 at 3:47 am #
Why does this Strauss fellow get all the ink? Where is all the love for Filmer and de Maistre. Now there are two guys who deserve to have schools of thought named after them.
Bede on 15 May 2007 at 10:44 am #
That’s a good question. No reputable scholar in philosophy or classics takes Strauss seriously. People often treat him as a joke. But you have a handful of neocon hacks, mostly in political science departments, who have elevated him to the status of godhood.
Conservative Times » Kirk, Hayek, and Strauss on 01 Jun 2007 at 1:09 am #
[...] the neocon Corner they are discussing “Berkowitz’s Big Three”- Kirk, Hayek, and Strauss – as the most influential conservatives of our age. Of course, I think this list is [...]