tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post1584217583539872614..comments2024-03-28T10:44:30.518-06:00Comments on American Creation: Mark David Hall: The Influence of the Reformed Tradition on the American Founding, Part VIII (Final)Brad Harthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17669677047039491864noreply@blogger.comBlogger17125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-77416017310296513762010-07-24T14:30:16.903-06:002010-07-24T14:30:16.903-06:00Phil,
I open things up in my lastest post. Feel f...Phil,<br /><br />I open things up in my lastest post. Feel free to talk about Strauss and the modernity vs. classical thought to your hearts content. I for one do appreciate you being around here and listen to what you have to say.King of Irelandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11793825722325763371noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-70455559851319125302010-07-24T11:52:24.641-06:002010-07-24T11:52:24.641-06:00Pinky,
No worries Phil. Just do not want to get d...Pinky,<br /><br />No worries Phil. Just do not want to get distracted from what Dr. Hall is saying. Strauss has been germane in much of the dialogue here lately. I would say just not here. I very well could be wrong. Peace. <br /><br />Jon links to the blog is his post. I think it is called The One Way.King of Irelandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11793825722325763371noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-81082034433951465402010-07-24T10:30:31.251-06:002010-07-24T10:30:31.251-06:00.
I've had my share of attacks by Tom. I don&#....<br />I've had my share of attacks by Tom. I don't hold that against him as long as he is able to express a little reciprocity. And, he seems quite amiable to that. (Sometimes it takes an extra jab or two.) <b>:<)</b> As long as a person can take his not always so subtle insults, there doesn't seem to be much problem. I thought we had this problem all worked out more than a year ago, KOI. Where were you?<br />.<br />Which blog of Jonathon's are you referencing?<br />.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756814849309388483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-80355275757277480722010-07-24T10:01:53.781-06:002010-07-24T10:01:53.781-06:00It is Jon's last post to his other blog. It ta...It is Jon's last post to his other blog. It talks about Fukuyama who is a Straussian. <br /><br />Nothing personal Phil. I do see some connection to the topics and Strauss. I even posted on it. But it does not have to come up every thread. It also does not have to be accusatory of Tom having a hidden agenda.King of Irelandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11793825722325763371noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-5237275629820141702010-07-24T09:01:04.742-06:002010-07-24T09:01:04.742-06:00.
By the way, I haven't seen any link regardin....<br />By the way, I haven't seen any link regarding a discussion on Strauss.<br />.<br />If you have it, give it. I'll check it out.<br />.<br />Who knows, maybe I can learn something.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756814849309388483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-83739416496044556882010-07-24T08:58:30.626-06:002010-07-24T08:58:30.626-06:00.
If you don't get the connection between Stra....<br />If you don't get the connection between Strauss and many of the posted articles here, then, of course, you won't see the relevance of any comment I might make about the same.<br />.<br /><br />In either case, why waste your time on argumentation?<br />.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756814849309388483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-32929451290592691152010-07-24T08:49:54.197-06:002010-07-24T08:49:54.197-06:00Pinky,
You have brought Strauss into every thread...Pinky,<br /><br />You have brought Strauss into every thread that I can think of for about two weeks. I wondered why and finally get it when you accuse Tom of hiding something and have a hidden agenda. You are saying that he is a Straussian and intentionally misleading people.<br /><br />I assume this gets into the whole Neo-Conservative crap and modern politics. This is really not the place for it. Jon's other blog discusses it all the time. There is in fact a thread over there now about Straussian thought that Jon linked here.King of Irelandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11793825722325763371noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-23357098092707708802010-07-24T06:20:26.701-06:002010-07-24T06:20:26.701-06:00.
It can easily be argued to the contrary, KOI.
.
....<br />It can easily be argued to the contrary, KOI.<br />.<br />Not a single one of us comes here without some bias. And, that is especially true of the ones who post the articles about which participants hold discussions.<br />.<br />It is appropriate, in our American society, to question to motives of those persons that present information in support of any view on our history.<br />.<br />Please don't waste time on petty complaints that some participant here doesn't get in line with what you think should be taking place here.<br />.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756814849309388483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-20301050063774421732010-07-23T18:53:52.100-06:002010-07-23T18:53:52.100-06:00I did. It has nothing to do with the post.I did. It has nothing to do with the post.King of Irelandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11793825722325763371noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-73275912291227444482010-07-23T14:46:59.610-06:002010-07-23T14:46:59.610-06:00.
Read the thread.
..<br />Read the thread.<br />.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756814849309388483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-26609272768519648482010-07-23T14:33:42.041-06:002010-07-23T14:33:42.041-06:00Pinky,
None of this has anything to do with the p...Pinky,<br /><br />None of this has anything to do with the post. I have been wondering why you keep bringing up the Strauss thing. Now I know that you are trying to use ad-hominem attacks to discredit Tom. That is so boring and has served to hijack many threads here. <br /><br />I would suggest dropping the accusations and just focusing on the content of the blog.King of Irelandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11793825722325763371noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-46466628916334822562010-07-23T07:15:39.412-06:002010-07-23T07:15:39.412-06:00.
I am often portrayed as some sort of a nincompoo....<br />I am often portrayed as some sort of a nincompoop by Tom.<br />.<br />It's best to take his insults with a grain of salt tossed over the shoulder. (Smile)<br />.<br />Much of what I know about Leo Strauss comes from <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Rebirth-Classical-Political-Rationalism-Introduction/dp/0226777146" rel="nofollow">This Book</a>. I don't claim any expertise; but, I am not what I am so disrespectfully painted to be by Mr. Van Dyke.<br />.<br />The book is a set of Strauss's essays selected and introduced by <a href="https://webspace.utexas.edu/tlp374/www/cv.html" rel="nofollow">Thomas L. Pangle</a>.<br />.<br />I'm also reading <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Strauss-American-Right-Prof-Shadia/dp/0312217838" rel="nofollow">a criticism of Strauss</a><br /><br />which I am reviewing at <a href="http://americansociety-today.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow">this site</a><br /><br />I read something in Pangle's introduction that strikes my fancy about overdoing things by some<br />scholars. The reader might get a smile on their face. I guess it was originally written by <a href="http://www.columbia.edu/~bmb21/" rel="nofollow">Brian Barry</a><br />.<br />"To spend one's working life rolling the classics round the tongue like old brandy (as<br />advocated by Leo Strauss and disciples) hardly seems likely to advance the sum of human<br />knowledge." (smile)<br />.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756814849309388483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-53431711736920726002010-07-22T11:08:53.899-06:002010-07-22T11:08:53.899-06:00Recently, Tom mentioned C. S. Pierce in one of his...Recently, Tom mentioned C. S. Pierce in one of his posts. Here's some of Pierce on authority:<br /><br /><b>The Path To Peace</b><br /><br /><i>"The method of authority will always govern the mass of mankind; and those who wield the<br />various forms of organized force in the state will never be convinced that dangerous reasoning<br />ought not be suppressed in some way. If liberty of speech is to be untrammeled from the grosser<br />forms of constraint, then uniformity of opinion will be secured by a moral terrorism to which the<br />respectability of society will give its thorough approval. Following the method of authority is the<br />path of peace. Certain non-conformities are permitted; certain others, considered unsafe, are<br />forbidden. These are different in different countries and in different ages; but, wherever you are,<br />let it be known that you seriously hold a tabooed belief, and you may be perfectly sure of being<br />treated with a cruelty less brutal but more refined than hunting you like a wolf. Thus, the greatest<br />intellectual benefactors of mankind have never dared, and dare not now, to utter the whole of<br />their thoughts; and thus a shade of prima facie doubt is cast upon every proposition which is<br />considered essential to the security of society. Singularly enough, the persecution does not all<br />come from without; but, a man torments himself and is oftentimes most distressed at finding<br />himself believing propositions which he has been brought up to regard with aversion. The<br />peaceful and sympathetic man will, therefore, find it hard to resist the temptation to submit his<br />opinions to authority."</i><br /><br />-------Charles Sanders PiercePhil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756814849309388483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-43096305130089568182010-07-22T06:38:11.729-06:002010-07-22T06:38:11.729-06:00.
By the way, that's you, Tom. You're one ....<br />By the way, that's you, Tom. You're one of those who likes to emphasize the importance of premodern thinking.<br />.<br />I'm more of an observer who makes observations once in a while.<br />.<br />You don't seem to like it.<br />.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756814849309388483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-91067717078901927452010-07-22T06:31:11.655-06:002010-07-22T06:31:11.655-06:00.
pshaw....
.
I don't claim Strauss had anythi....<br />pshaw....<br />.<br />I don't claim Strauss had anything to do with rights in my post above.<br />.<br />What I wrote was more about Straussians putting an inordinate focus on premodern thinking.<br />.<br />Period.<br />.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756814849309388483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-23332188498285244002010-07-21T22:43:04.143-06:002010-07-21T22:43:04.143-06:00Strauss does not recognize "rights" as w...Strauss does not recognize "rights" as we know them in this modern age.<br /><br />However, Donald Lutz argues that 3/4 of the rights in The Bill of Rights date back to the are in the 1641 Massachusetts Body of Liberties, with a Bible verse attached to each one.<br /><br />Your call, "Pinky." Pls let us know the results of your research into this claim.<br /><br /><br /><a href="http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:6INykiGbiYcJ:www.contra-mundum.org/cm/features/01_infidels.pdf+mark+noll+%22black+regiment%22&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESg01O7M9CPuznAxzPwmqV1ztJZjx7nNgFjVN3MYfTkuIafz9Np1XpEaabIy9qesLmunwpUMiNgAwJ4tffkwWm4z0y5lDjPTQuigJELKRamuOvy2w03TjGly-QYb6m5NAH3GfhYa&sig=AHIEtbTyiv8UXwmKeMHynUlcfZGBA2LQ0A" rel="nofollow">Here.</a><br /><br />You continually intimate somebody's trying to sell you something. True.<br /><br />Somebody's trying to sell you on doing some research into the facts and reporting back even when you [inevitably] don't like the results, not just moving onto the next thing.<br /><br />So far, we get the latter in place of the former. But it is fun to watch the gyrations and machinations, even if I'm the only one who notices, which I apparently am.Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-31529795534868986062010-07-21T13:04:41.488-06:002010-07-21T13:04:41.488-06:00There--almost--seems to be an inordinate amount of...There--almost--seems to be an inordinate amount of focus on the origins of those rights specifically outlined in the first ten amendments, The Bill of Rights, to our Constitution.<br />.<br />I'm not thinking that there wasn't a religious sense that helped fuel where the Founders and other colonists stood regarding such an important issue. It would have been near impossible for religion to not have played a role in the Founding--not only Christianity; but, all religions.<br />.<br />And, the idea of the focus being almost inordinate brings up the teachings of Leo Strauss. I think it is appropriate to give a quotation from pages 48 & 49 of Shadia Drury's book to make a point:<br /><br /><i>Strauss is a highly regarded scholar of Jewish thought, ... In view of the fact that Strauss divides the history of thought into the wise ancients and the vulgar moderns, it is quite legitimate to attribute to him the ideas he attributes to his wise ancients. Maimonides is a classic case in point; an examination of Strauss's study of Maimonides is therefore bound to reveal a great deal not only about Strauss's view of Judaism, but also about Strauss's political philosophy as a whole.<br />...<br />...<br />Strauss's interpretation of Maimonides combines the two opposite accounts in a uniquely Straussian reading in which Maimonides emerges as a Straussian. Whenever Strauss examines the work of a great thinker, he invariably uncovers himself. Strauss's interpretations of Plato, Aristotle, Xenophon, Alfarabi, Averroes, Maimonides, and the other greats, tells us more about Strauss than about the thinkers in question. The point that Strauss wishes to impress upon us is that there can never be any disagreements among the wise on any matters of substance. And since his own teaching accords perfectly with ancient wisdom, its truth cannot be questioned, and anyone who dares to question it must be a fool. One thing for which Strauss deserves credit is his masterful use of the old argument from authority--something is true because the divine Plato says so. This is the subtle process of intimidation that is integral to a Straussian education.</i><br />.<br />I think we should use discrimination to help us consider whether or not some of the contributions here are not deeply influenced by Strauss's teaching in the positions. Bloggers most certainly have every right to be positioned anyway they like; but, because Straussians are so esoteric in their presentations, it seems we all should be a little suspicious when there seems to be an overdone focus.<br />.<br />By the token that Strauss might be 1963ish, some of the posts are ancientish.<br />.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756814849309388483noreply@blogger.com