Posted on 12/26/2003 4:58:06 PM PST by Federalist 78
From Revolution to Reconstruction: Presidents: Thomas Jefferson: ...
It is fortunate for us that Platonic republicanism has not obtained the same favor as Platonic Christianity; or we should now have been all living, men, women and children, pell mell together, like beasts of the field or forest. Yet `Plato is a great Philosopher,' said La Fontaine. But says Fontenelle `do you find his ideas very clear'? `Oh no! he is of an obscurity impenetrable.' `Do you not find him full of contradictions?' `Certainly,' replied La Fontaine, `he is but a Sophist.' Yet immediately after, he exclaims again, `Oh Plato was a great Philosopher.' Socrates had reason indeed to complain of the misrepresentations of Plato; for in truth his dialogues are libels on Socrates.
Evolution and Dissemination of the Parental Liberty Doctrine ...
In reciprocal letters to Jefferson, John Adams was equally critical. He said the "philosophy" of Plato was "absurd," Letter from John Adams to Thomas Jefferson (June 28, 1812), in Letters, at 308, berated Plato's concept of "a Community of Wives, a confusion of Families, a total extinction of all Relations of Father, Son and Brother," Letter from John Adams to Thomas Jefferson (September 15, 1813), in Letters, at 377, and observed that "Plato calls ['Love'] a demon," Letter from John Adams to Thomas Jefferson (October 10, 1817), in Letters, at 522.
In his most telling observations, Adams described his meticulous study of Plato's writings, expressed delight at knowing that Jefferson shared the same "Astonishment," "disappointment," and "disgust" with Plato, and then concluded as follows:
Some Parts of [his writings] . . . are entertaining . . . but his Laws and his Republick from which I expected the most, disappointed me most. I could scarcely exclude the suspicion that he intended the latter as a bitter Satyr upon all Republican Government . . . . Nothing can be conceived more destructive of human happiness; more infallibly contrived to transform Men and Women into Brutes, Yahoos, or Daemons than a Community of Wives and Property . . .
After all; as long as marriage exists, Knowledge, Property and Influence will accumulate in Families.
Letter from John Adams to Thomas Jefferson (July 16, 1814), in Letters, at 437.
Thoughts on Government by Professor Ellis Sandoz
A good government, Adams insists, must be an "empire of laws" and not of men so that justice and not passion is the basis of order–as Aristotle taught in Politics, Book III.
….This time we hear John Adams the elder-statesman writing to his old comrade and (as he said) fellow "Argonaut" of the Founding Thomas Jefferson in 1813, one in Quincy and the other in Monticello, retired ex-presidents with their political differences finally put aside. The heart of the revolutionary American community lay, Adams wrote and Jefferson did not disagree, in the universally accepted "general principles of Christianity" shared by everyone, by which he chiefly meant the Ten Commandments and the Sermon on the Mount, and in the "general principles of English and American Liberty, in which all those young men united [who fought the Revolution], and which had united all parties in America, in majorities sufficient to assert and maintain her Independence. Now I will avow [Adams continued], that I then believed, and now believe, that those general Principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the Existence and attributes of God; and those principles of liberty are as unalterable as human nature and our terrestrial, mundane system."
Notes On "Thus Spake Zarathustra" By Anthony M. Ludovici.
In morality, Nietzsche starts out by adopting the position of the relativist. He says there are no absolute values "good" and "evil"; these are mere means adopted by all in order to acquire power to maintain their place in the world, or to become supreme.
"Zarathustra" is my brother's most personal work; it is the history of his most individual experiences, of his friendships, ideals, raptures, bitterest disappointments and sorrows.
Am I understood?...The overcoming of morality through itself-through truthfulness, the overcoming of the moralist through his opposite-THROUGH ME-: that is what the name Zarathustra means in my mouth."
Plato's understanding of Socrates is really quite profound. The pedagogical value of Platonic writings in schools is indispensable. Plato never fails to engage critical thinking because it asks the important questions. Of course, if your teacher is Jefferson, no such luck. But for one who understands what's at stake in education, Plato is a treasure.
He points out the can-should argument. Just because you can, doesn't mean you should. That is important for the expansive ego today. When the conversation turns to suicide, Socrates reminds us that just because you can, doens't mean you should. You shouldn't, because one's life doesn't belong to one's self.
When his students get tired of his questioning, he warns them against the hatred of words and arguments. Not good--such hatred is a symptom of misanthropy.
When at the beginning of the Republic he encounters some friends, they compel him to join up with them. He asks, "why should I." They answer, because we are more than you.
In the end, at the close of the Apology, he recognizes his fate: "I go to die, you to live, and who of us goes to the better lot is known only to God."
Nietzsche didn't like Socrates, and probably for the same reason he preferred to see himself as anti-christian.
A brilliant work and all men were highly influential.
I personally understand FN to have been the Steven Hawking of the Psyche and the worlds first Psychologist. Actually in my readings FN has great respect for Plato and goes back and forth in a love hate relationship.
FN was a peer to Plato and was in a position to criticize. Philosophers are notorious for their sometimes petty and sometimes profound differences.
I find that Nietzsche's profundity and confounding writings mirror the enigma of reality itself or gordian World Knot.
Doubt it. Christian charity is CHARITY. Government "charity" (socialism) is not charity...it is enforced giving.
True christianity is allowing people to give out of a true sense of compassion, not compulsion.
By the way...the more I read of Plato, the fruitier I think him.
--
Socrates
Plato begins his last work, the Laws, with a most profound question. The Athenian walks with two friends from Knossos and the question is raised, where do the laws come from, a god or a man. If you think that is fruity business, I'll just have to pray for you.
Back when ex-presidents really RETIRED!
Wouldn't it be great if ex-presidents Carter and Clinton retired to their respective Quincy and Montecello and wrote letters to each other. They could pen-pal with Dukakis and Mondale.
Christian Socialists in Europe had nothing to do with Marx. The word "socialism" came into use in France and England soon after 1825 and had been probably coined by Auguste Comte, a mathematician and the founder of sociology
I'm puzzled how Navrozov gives Comte a free pass. The guy was a Secular Humainst.
Why? Because you agree with the madman?
Nietzche gloried in the sewer of self-worship and died there, a blithering, braying jackass.
The great enabler of Hitler prophesied his own cruel, surpassingly evil impact on the world through his vicious ideas. Though the boil is lanced, the poison is not drained yet.
A few more "thinkers" such as Nieztsche and the world will be left an inheritance to the cockroaches and blowflies.
Nitezsche was a punk, a well-written punk.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.