Home / Quotes / Quote by Leo Strauss

Quote by Leo Strauss

“What is called freedom of thought in a large number of cases amounts to—and even for all practical purposes consists of—the ability to choose between two or more different views presented by the small minority of people who are public speakers or writers. If this choice is prevented, the only kind of intellectual independence of which many people are capable is destroyed, and that is the only freedom of thought which is of political importance.”

Book:Persecution and the Art of Writing

Work

Persecution and the Art of Writing

This book delves into the ways in which writers have been influenced by persecution, examining how it has shaped their work and contributed to the development of various literary forms and styles. more

Author

Leo Strauss

Leo Strauss was a prominent philosopher born on September 20, 1899, and died on October 18, 1973. His thoughts were deeply influenced by classical philosophy and German philosophy, especially by Martin Heidegger's philosophical ideas. Strauss's main contribution lies in his reinterpretation of political philosophy, emphasizing the close connection between political philosophy and moral philosophy. more

“In fact, it is by no means certain that the purpose of Plato or of Aristotle, as Fārābī understood it, required the actualization of the best political order or of the virtuous city. Fārābī adumbrates the problem by making a distinction between Socrates’ investigations and Plato’s investigations, as well as between “the way of Socrates” and the way adopted eventually by Plato. “The science and the art of Socrates” which is to be found in Plato’s Laws, is only a part of Plato’s, the other part being “the science and the art of Timaeus” which is to be found in the Timaeus. “The way of Socrates” is characterized by the emphasis on “the scientific investigation of justice and the virtues,” whereas the art of Plato is meant to supply “the science of the essence of every being” and hence especially the science of the divine and on the natural things. The difference between the way of Socrates and the way of Plato points back to the difference between the attitude of the two men toward the actual cities. The crucial difficulty was created by the political or social status of philosophy: in the nations and cities of Plato’s time, there was no freedom of teaching and of investigation. Socrates was therefore confronted with the alternative, whether he should choose security and life, and thus conform with the false opinions and the wrong way of life of his fellow-citizens, or else non-conformity and death. Socrates chose non-conformity and death. Plato found a solution to the problem posed by the fate of Socrates, in founding the virtuous city in speech: only in that “other city” can man reach his perfection. Yet, according to Fārābī, Plato “repeated” his account of the way of Socrates and he “repeated” the mention of the vulgar of the cities and nations which existed in his time. The repetition amounts to a considerable modification of the first statement, or to a correction of the Socratic way. The Platonic way, as distinguished from the Socratic way, is a combination of the way of Socrates with the way of Thrasymachus; for the intransigent way of Socrates is appropriate only for the philosopher’s dealing with the elite, whereas the way of Thrasymachus, which is both more and less exacting than the former, is appropriate for his dealing with the vulgar. What Fārābī suggests is that by combining the way of Socrates with the way of Thrasymachus, Plato avoided the conflict with the vulgar and thus the fate of Socrates. Accordingly, the revolutionary quest for the other city ceased to be necessary: Plato substituted it for a more constructive way of action, namely, the gradual replacement of the accepted opinions by the truth or an approximation of the truth. The replacement of the accepted opinions could not be gradual, if it were not accompanied by a provisional acceptance of the accepted opinions: as Fārābī elsewhere declares, conformity with the opinions of the religious community in which one is brought up, is a necessary qualification for the future philosopher. The replacement of the accepted opinions could not be gradual if it were not accompanied by the suggestion of opinions which, while pointing toward the truth, do not too flagrantly contradict the accepted opinions. We may say that Fārābī’s Plato eventually replaces the philosopher-king who rules openly in the virtuous city, by the secret kingship of the philosopher who, being “a perfect man” precisely because he is an “investigator,” lives privately as a member of an imperfect society which he tries to humanize within the limits of the possible.”

Plato Socrates Esotericism 1952 Philosopher King

Book:Persecution and the Art of Writing

Source: Persecution and the Art of Writing

“Owing to the position which “the science of kalām” acquired in Islam, the status of philosophy in Islam was intermediate between its status in Christianity and in Judaism. To turn therefore to the status of philosophy within Judaism, it is obvious that while no one can be learned in the sacred doctrine of Christianity without having had considerable philosophic training, one can be a perfectly competent talmudist without having had any philosophic training. Jews of the philosophic competence of Halevi and Maimonides took it for granted that being a Jew and being a philosopher are mutually exclusive. At first glance, Maimonides’ Guide for the Perplexed is the Jewish counterpart of Thomas Aquinas’ Summa Theologica; but the Guide never acquired within Judaism even a part of the authority which the Summa enjoyed within Christianity; not Maimonides’ Guide, but his Mishnah Torah, i.e., his codification of Jewish law, could be described as the Jewish counterpart to the Summa. Nothing is more revealing than the difference between the beginnings of the Guide and the Summa. The first article of the Summa deals with the question as to whether the sacred doctrine is required besides the philosophic disciplines: Thomas as it were justifies the sacred doctrine before the tribunal of philosophy. One cannot even imagine Maimonides opening the Guide, or any other work, with a discussion of the question as to whether the Halakha (the sacred Law) is required besides the philosophic disciplines.”

Philosophy Introduction 1945 1952 Aquinas Maimonides

Book:Persecution and the Art of Writing

Source: Persecution and the Art of Writing

“Look, suppose you’re an official in the National Science Foundation, and a guy comes to you and says: Listen I have this interesting idea, give me $100,000 and I’ll work on it. And then 50 of the most respected people in the field come up to you and say: Look, the guy’s crazy, that can’t be true. Who are you going to believe? You’re going to end up supporting a very conservative, middle brow scientific institution. It’s hopeless.”

Science Funding

Author:Jerry Fodor

“ЩЕ ТИ КАЖА НЕЩО - едно време децата искаха кукла за сестра си, влакче за приятелите си, шейна за семейството, основни неща...., за другите и не само за себе си! казваха "Моля" и "Благодаря" и искаха хубави работи, като куче, братче, татко да работи по-малко за да си играят заедно, мама да прави по-често празничните си ореховки.... Желанията в миналите поколения бяха по-обмислени, имаше загриженост...., а днес? - чуваш само "дай ми..., дай ми..., дай!", изписват се милиони писма с коледни желания и нито с "Благодаря", а дори не са молби, а искания!!! Коледата се изхабява в компютаризирани картички, он-лайн каталози, от които можеш да си поръчаш дори надуваема Снежанка, облечена като фолк-певачка... Кой вече изпраща хартиени саморъчно написани картички, без да препише добре запаметено еднакво със стотици други поздравче - SMS...., а за ръчно направена украса дори няма да говоря.... Хората външно спазват традициите, но духът на Коледа го няма...., за това и чудесата й не ни намират... Копнеем за магията...., а сме я отблъснали от нас... За да оживее всяко нещо му е нужно сърце - трябва да вложим нашето сърце, нещо от себе си...., дори да е просто "нашите лични думи" в поздравителните си статуси, картички и желания... Тогава...., оооооо - тогава какво чудо само бихме могли да получим! БИХМЕ МОГЛИ !..... Нали?....”