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.
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.
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.
Oh well, sloppiness is a way of life for some people, and it's reflected in their writing.
Jefferson goes up several notches in my book.
Thinkers have different places in the intellectual universe. Darwin may be fine in some sphere of biology and its development, but not be a good guide to things outside that sphere. I don't know whether he ever claimed to be any sort of moral teacher or guide to life. Even if he did, we don't have to.
Nietzsche is a different case -- a truly dangerous thinker. But it wouldn't hurt to remember how he grew out of Victorian conditions. When life becomes safe and predictable, some people inevitably seek danger. It's not something one should form one's philosophy of life around, but Nietzsche is a good reminder that if we don't have real challenges, we seek more powerful artificial sensations and end up destroying ourselves.
Navrozov wrote a fine autobiography about growing up in the Soviet Union, but he's a very eccentric and erratic thinker, and something of a narcissist. His writing doesn't always have a focus, and he throws himself into pointless feuds with other writers. His son, also a writer, shares some of his father's traits.
Either Jefferson read the worst translation ever made of The Republic, or his reputation as a thinker is vastly inflated. There is no unintelligible jargon in The Republic (and I have wasted countless nights on unreadable, jargon-filled books), which is not only the greatest work of philosophy ever written, but a literary masterpiece, as well.
Clumsy, pretentious opening. No serious, independent thinker would lean on The Closing of the American Mind. Bloom wrote a powerful, provocative book, but it suffered from its own clumsy class pretentions, and Bloom's worship of Nazi Martin Heidegger (which Bloom's fans ignored, and critics failed to notice or grasp). "I'm not a philosopher, but I play one for NewsMax."
The best-known book of Plato-Socrates, written by Plato, since Socrates did not write but expressed himself orally, describes the ideal State and hence is entitled "The State," mistranslated into English as "The Republic," though "republic" is a Latin, not Greek, word that appeared after Plato’s death.
Dunce. The works were by Plato, who at times quotes Socrates, but at other times put his own words in Socrates' mouth. The Republic is one of Plato's books least influenced by Socrates. Why? Because Socrates never professed to have answers, only questions. But The Republic claims to have ALL the answers.
The ideal State of Plato-Socrates resembles the tyrannical Sparta, a mortal enemy of Athenian democracy, but this ideal State of Plato-Socrates is far more Spartan than Sparta. It is a countrywide cattle-breeding farm on which pedigree human cattle are raised.
Yeah, and it's Plato's ideal, not that of Socrates. I wonder if this mook even bothered READING Plato, or if he just skimmed Bloom.