tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post7779050304504964612..comments2024-03-28T10:44:30.518-06:00Comments on American Creation: The Founding Fathers and the Nature of Man: An Appeal for ClarityBrad Harthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17669677047039491864noreply@blogger.comBlogger17125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-90048459435685621502010-07-21T11:05:54.471-06:002010-07-21T11:05:54.471-06:00I think love your neighbor as yourself is the key ...I think love your neighbor as yourself is the key to understand self interest rightly understood.King of Irelandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11793825722325763371noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-14020097653033352912010-07-21T11:04:07.666-06:002010-07-21T11:04:07.666-06:00Jon stated:
"Didn't Martin Luther once s...Jon stated:<br /><br />"Didn't Martin Luther once say, reason is the devil's whore."<br /><br />This about sums it all up. But that is only one steam of the river of Christian thought.King of Irelandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11793825722325763371noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-37589649488763961172010-07-21T10:56:50.691-06:002010-07-21T10:56:50.691-06:00Mr. Talmage,
If you follow the link back to Dr. ...Mr. Talmage,<br /><br />If you follow the link back to Dr. Hall's original post there are plenty of quotes there that reflect both fallen man and human flourishing. It is in the comments section.<br /><br />This post was the first of what will probably turn into a series of posts that will fill in the holes. As stated in the post itself, this was just to outline the argument and frame the discussion.King of Irelandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11793825722325763371noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-21237476280600432412010-07-20T12:58:00.585-06:002010-07-20T12:58:00.585-06:00Ms. Van De Merwe, meet Mr. Tocqueville, and self-i...Ms. Van De Merwe, meet <a href="http://www.futurecasts.com/Tocqueville,%20Democracy%20in%20America.htm" rel="nofollow">Mr. Tocqueville</a>, and self-interest, rightly understood.<br /><br />Well done.Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-11274753425820665242010-07-20T12:53:49.198-06:002010-07-20T12:53:49.198-06:00Tom,
My first entry was asking for a more wide or ...Tom,<br />My first entry was asking for a more wide or global view of history. So often historians loose the forest for the trees, and much can be learned from understanding a wider sweep/scope of how things evolved.<br /><br />Revelation and reason is always a tension. As man learns more and more about his world, he has to re-vamp his understanding to encompass that knowledge. This education IS revelation, BUT, at the same time, one cannot undermine the limitation of man's reason, such as been pointed out here, in the French Revolution.<br /><br />Whenever we partake of the "heady thought" that there are some superior beings/humans, then we are doomed to make the mistakes of past history. Men don't change in that sense. Power is heady, intoxicating and addictive. Lord Acton said, "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely"!!! Humility is in order...Angie Van De Merwehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12617299120618867829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-8501495833946536412010-07-20T12:39:47.267-06:002010-07-20T12:39:47.267-06:00But, I might add that social co-operation can be s...But, I might add that social co-operation can be stunted as well by self-interest. And this is not wrong, when those that resist such co-operation are seeking acknowledgment of some principle that is being negated.<br /><br />Think about those who resisted in our Revolution, of course. These were being taxed without representation. The ruling party was abusing their power over the "peasants".<br /><br />Think about any social/moral/political reformer and they brought about change through resistance to those who negated a principle of justice. These are intellectuals, social activists, human rights activists, pro-life activists, planned parenthood, etc. The varieties of what principles one adheres to is various in free societies, and such as it should be.Angie Van De Merwehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12617299120618867829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-28006694652630784582010-07-20T12:26:59.062-06:002010-07-20T12:26:59.062-06:00Tom,
Whether one is a Christian who believes one ...Tom, <br />Whether one is a Christian who believes one must have a personal encounter with God, or one who believes that education is necessary to protect the classes from abuse of power, or whether one is an evolutionary biologist, men are self-interested.<br /><br />Self-interest is not sinful, but it CAN be. Self-interest is what promotes co-operation. Our business contracts are based on protecting 'self-interest'. Man cannot be trusted apart from such "necessities" it seems.<br /><br />Self interest is how men are made in sustaining themselves as separate entities. And separate entities need to have distinctive needs acknowledged, which is another reaon why the social contract necessitates the business contract. We are protected from sacrificing our self-interested goals, when we have negotiated the goals, and the means to those goals.<br /><br />Good leaders always consider those in their team as necessary elements. And our capitalistic system understands that self-interested individual are more productive than those that are socially co-erced, as in communist regimes or dictatorships!Angie Van De Merwehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12617299120618867829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-73223769118427990062010-07-20T11:51:31.176-06:002010-07-20T11:51:31.176-06:00KoI,
You wrote:
"What is much easier to disc...KoI,<br /><br />You wrote:<br />"What is much easier to discern is the question of how the founders viewed the nature of man which, as stated above, is the end of the discussions on reason and revelation to begin with. I think it is safe to say that most, if not all, of them believed in some way that man was fallen and chose the American form of government based on that notion."<br /><br />As someone who only started thinking about this subject over the past year or so, it would be helpful to me, and perhaps others, if you could provide quotes from the founders to back up this point. <br /><br />For example, you quote from Dr. Hall who writes,<br /><br />"John Witherspoon’s student James Madison wrote in Federalist 51 that “if men were angles, no government would be necessary.” Almost to a person America’s founders were convinced that humans are self-interested or, in theological language, sinful."<br /><br />I have a question about the quote from Federalist 51. The quote in context is as follows:<br /><br />"It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself."<br /><br />It's curious, is it not, that the second half of the quote appeared in this blog on June 27 atributed to Alexander Hamilton. No one objected at the time that it was Madison who wrote this. Are we to understand that Madison wrote one part of a paragraph and Hamilton another part? Perhaps you can clear this up for me.Joe Talmadgenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-2920314634611868502010-07-20T10:42:50.762-06:002010-07-20T10:42:50.762-06:00Angie,
I'm not following your point.Angie,<br /><br />I'm not following your point.Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-15233977957511836732010-07-20T09:32:07.652-06:002010-07-20T09:32:07.652-06:00Tom,
Ok, the Catholics believe that man is "d...Tom,<br />Ok, the Catholics believe that man is "deprived", NOT "depraved". The difference is one of quantity. Is reason fallen such that no appeal can be made? And salvation means that one must experience a supernatural encounter?<br /><br />The Reformation began because Luther challenged the authorities over the sell of indulgences. and other various 'thesis"...He translated the scriptures not be cause of their infallibility and salvation message, so much as their educational value...<br /><br />So, reason was revelation. Education is not a trascendental encounter, but a rational engagement with facts about the real world.<br /><br />It was only when the Church was challenged with "universalism" that fundamentalists felt the need to "guard the gates" to their "traditional understanding of "sola scriptura". <br /><br />Unfortunately, "sola scriptura" was the means of undermining authority in the Catholic Church. so, many times, I think we do not take into account the context when we evaluate history, in the whole. We grasp at one aspect of history as if that portion is what we want to protect, when what we are fighting for has little to do with the real facts that are behind the historical situation.Angie Van De Merwehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12617299120618867829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-12715937370161026372010-07-19T15:25:10.824-06:002010-07-19T15:25:10.824-06:00...and check this out
http://theoldhighchurchman.......and check this out<br /><br />http://theoldhighchurchman.blogspot.com/2010/06/why-big-fuss.html<br /><br />for why I'll never be an expert on Protestantism. Nobody is, especially Protestants! Is Anglicanism more Lutheran, Calvinist, or via Hooker, still pretty Catholic? I have no idea, and it seems nobody else does, either.Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-51178438981323148072010-07-19T15:06:09.947-06:002010-07-19T15:06:09.947-06:00What's interesting is how quickly reason rease...What's interesting is how quickly reason reaserts itself in the followers of Luther and Calvin. That's the real story.<br /><br />I'm no expert on Protestantism, but<br /><br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philipp_Melanchthon<br /><br />is said to have been a Founder of Lutheranism as much as Luther, and this<br /><br />http://www.ccel.org/s/schaff/encyc/encyc07/htm/ii.x.iv.htm<br /><br />argues <br /><br /><i>In his Epitome philosophiae moralis Melanchthon treats first the relation of philosophy to the law of God and the Gospel. Moral philosophy, it is true, does not know anything of the promise of grace as revealed in the Gospel, but it is the development of the natural law implanted by God in the heart of man, and therefore representing a part of the divine law. The revealed law, necessitated because of sin, is distinguished from natural law only by its greater completeness and clearness. The fundamental order of moral life can be grasped also by reason; therefore the development of moral philosophy from natural principles must not be neglected. Melanchthon therefore made no sharp distinction between natural and revealed morals. </i><br /><br />which leads us right back to Thomistic natural law.Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-85202861955408705822010-07-19T08:58:46.311-06:002010-07-19T08:58:46.311-06:00"As Tom Van Dyke would put it, he seems to be..."As Tom Van Dyke would put it, he seems to believe that because we are depraved that reason is our enemy not our friend."<br /><br />Didn't Martin Luther once say, reason is the devil's whore.Jonathan Rowehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04079637406589278386noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-80476163040750163382010-07-18T18:32:38.025-06:002010-07-18T18:32:38.025-06:00As a Jew fleeing Hitler's Germany, Strauss cou...As a Jew fleeing Hitler's Germany, Strauss could never hold that anyone is inferior by nature.<br /><br />Still, there are folks who prefer not to think for themselves, whether they're fundamentalist creationists or the people who are slaves to their education and can't believe there was a Christian dimension to the American Founding.<br /><br />Whatchagonna do? This is what Aristotle meant by some people being "natural slaves."<br /><br />What Christian love does, and even proper teaching without the "Christianity" thing as a proper parent-surrogate, is demand that people think for themselves. That is the best thing a parent or a teacher can do for the young. That, and educate/habituate the kids toward virtue, so they don't destroy their young lives before their lives even get started.<br /><br />Even an ape teaches her young not to mess with cobras.<br /><br />Strauss is a Platonist, and what's interesting is that in <i>Republic</i>, Plato slips in the radical idea that even <i>women</i> might become "Guardians," the selfless rulers of the state.<br /><br />I know they call Plato a fascist, but he was the first Liberated Man.<br /><br />Are there two levels of humans? Only by choice, and as Locke wrote in his <i>Letter Concerning Tolerance</i>, even the magistrate can't save a man's soul. Soteriology.<br /><br />If virtue is a habit, and Aristotle said it is, then sin, and self-destruction, is a habit, too.<br /><br />All a society say by "legislating morality" is, check yourself before you wreck yourself. Nobody, not Aristotle or Aquinas or Locke, ever said that you can legislate immorality or sin out of existence. That's beyond man's power, and especially beyond the power of the law.<br /><br />You wanna wreck yourself, no religion, society, law, state, family or friend can stop you. God gave you free will.Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-47490979814035397432010-07-18T17:15:02.572-06:002010-07-18T17:15:02.572-06:00"See, it's not whether Strauss is wrong o..."See, it's not whether Strauss is wrong or right, or a neo-con or a fascist---he was actually an FDR Democrat---it's that his clarity attracted leftists, rightists, priests, atheists."<br /><br />Clarity is what we need to pursue. I think one can make a case, though I know Hitler claimed to be Catholic and used some of Luther's words, that Hitler was the harvest of the bad parts of the French Revolution. I am sure this was Strauss' claim. <br /><br />BUTTT if you tame liberalism with the founding theology on rights and where they came from you get the good stuff and avoid the extremes. <br /><br />In the end Hitler was trying to perfect the human race. Darwinism gone wild. This is my worry today. You starting to see some of the same stuff.<br /><br />Did Strauss agree with Kraynak that there were two levels of humans? This is disturbing as well.King of Irelandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11793825722325763371noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-28068531557160569062010-07-18T17:02:53.685-06:002010-07-18T17:02:53.685-06:00I cannot disagree, King. It's Leo Strauss who...I cannot disagree, King. It's Leo Strauss who speaks of "the philosopher open to the challenge of theology or the theologian open to the challenge of philosophy."<br /><br />However, theology via Aquinas has more than held up its end. Philosophy, especially of the modern kind---and even Strauss, in my view, by discarding natural law---has not.<br /><br />Natural law, and Aquinas, and the American Founding's theologico-political problem stands astride Strauss' project.<br /><br />Not that Strauss is to be blamed, mind you. He cast his lot with philosophy, not in small part to oppose the philosophical brilliance of Martin Heidegger, perhaps the greatest philosophical mind of the 20th century, and who was a Nazi.<br /><br />Indeed if reason and revelation lead to the same place, <br /><br /><i>The law of nature and the law of revelation are both divine: they flow, though in different channels, from the same adorable source...</i>---James Wilson, American Founder<br /><br />then Strauss' decision is correct, to keep the river of reason unpolluted by religion, proof that it arrives at the sea just the same.<br /><br />Philosophically, not politically speaking, of course. The alternative, whether religious or secular, is to have the world become one big soup, either a theocracy, or as Alexandre Kojeve, the intellectual father of the European Union, wanted, a Universal Homogeneous State. [Which sounds a lot like <i>1984</i>.]<br /><br />For the Strauss-Kojeve correspondence, see Strauss' <i>On Tyranny</i>, much of which you can read here in <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=EiNk1iNi4EkC&printsec=frontcover&dq=strauss+on+tyranny&hl=en&ei=EIZDTKefEoKksQP2v-zNDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false" rel="nofollow"> Google Book Preview</a>. Back of the book, p. 217.<br /><br />See, it's not whether Strauss is wrong or right, or a neo-con or a fascist---he was actually an FDR Democrat---it's that his clarity attracted leftists, rightists, priests, atheists.<br /><br />[I'm in the middle of giving Uncle Leo a smack upside the head over natural law in that other forum. It's a Libra thing; most folks wouldn't understand.]Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-40980476242025187712010-07-18T16:17:56.431-06:002010-07-18T16:17:56.431-06:00I would submit that the founding view of the natur...I would submit that the founding view of the nature of man was more a product of the Renaissance than the Enlightenment. I could not figure out a way to work that into the post without muddying the waters. Nonetheless, there is such a thing a Christian humanism that by far pre-dates that of secular humanism. <br /><br />An overemphasis on the importance of the Protestant Reformation and ignoring of history that pre-dates it losing this larger trend in thinking that I believe starting when Aquinas and the West woke up from a long slumber when Greek thought was interjected back into society with the cultural exchanges with the Muslims.King of Irelandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11793825722325763371noreply@blogger.com