Posted on 12/08/2002 12:25:26 PM PST by betty boop
Good grief! but I have just given you a citation from Voegelin's own published work that would suggest to any reasonable person that Voegelin held Cicero's insight in the highest esteem.
Assuredly, on strength of the citation, Voegelin did not regard Cicero as a "nonentity."
So what's your beef?
I hear you (I think), lds23. But then these solipsistic "filters" can filter out Reality only so long.... At the end of the day, the tail does not wag the dog.
As Magritte's Treachery of Images points out ("This is not a pipe"), we can be severely limited in our understanding of reality, mostly by our assumption set, but even among the best of us by the very limits of experiential "physics", if you will.
Reality, even when spelled with a capital "R", is merely an attempt to nail jello to the wall.
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy"
You have a copy?
Is that a metaphor?
Somewhere around here, under six thousand other things in the basement - I haven't seen it in a couple of years, so that's where I assume it to be. I may have a revelation otherwise later, though ;)
I did a quick lookup of the exact title - it's "Faith and Political Philosophy: The Correspondence Between Leo Strauss and Eric Voegelin, 1934-1964", Peter Emberley and Barry Cooper, eds. Ted McAllister's book on Voegelin and Strauss is worthwhile, too, but I don't have a copy of that one.
Anyway, it's worth checking out, even if you're not a Straussian - Strauss's critiques of Voegelin are right on target, IMO...
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy"
At a certain level of this problem, I can hear ya, lds23. But what you describe does not seem to me to be an occasion for despair; for the Christian virtue of hope is still alive notwithstanding: It seems to me you haven't quite thought through the ramifications of what Voegelin has propounded in this essay....
You can slice and dice reality any which way you want to. But IMHO the point is (and always will be): God always gets the "last word." And that is the very constitution of hope itself for simple folk like me....
And I think the phrase goes, "my dear Horatio...." Let's not leave out that little obeisance of "routine", customary human courtesy/commerce here....
Dear tpaine, for Voegelin -- taking a page from Plato -- the authentic "authority figures" in society are never the same people as the people who wield political power.
Who said they were? Not I. -- The fact remains that his essay is a sham if based on such an obvious truism.
Bona fide "authority figures" are philosophers, not politicians. Plato, for one, said the polis (the "state," or government) is an organic community, a common culture formed in the crucible of "the human condition," extended into the forms of public life, for the welfare of the polity and the individuals who comprise it. A lot has changed since then. The political class these days who so bedevil and impede us in the exercise of basic human freedoms, are the very same who refuse to pay homage to the conditio humana, to the basic human condition as explicated by ancient (and modern) experiential understandings of human existence. The political class hates personal liberty as an affront to its own authority and privilege. This is not a modern development -- it has always been so, throughout history....
Nice lecture. Why do you think it applies to my point above?
The Framers certainly knew this. They tried to protect us, their "progeny," from such an outcome. They used the language of the classical and Christian thinkers to defend us against just such an outcome. But hardly anybody seems to realize that, these days.
Least of all you -- unfortunately, who seemingly has the most to gain from getting this problem "right," given your love for Liberty....
Amazing jump in your 'logic' betty. -- You're lecturing me on the obvious, when suddenly you flat out declare that I don't 'realize' some imaginary point. - Weird. - Just what is this problem you claim I can't get "right"?
The denizens of Second Reality simply hate First Reality; not only do they themselves not want to "live there"; but if given the power to do so, they would prohibit anybody else from "living there."
Meaningless generalizations as these 'realities' you discuss are not established. You & V. believe they exist. - I don't. I see only one reality about us.
There is a simple formula involved here. It's called the Will to Power. And the Will to Power is the creature of Second Reality. It has no source in First Reality -- which is constituted by and in God. (I just know you'll hate me for saying that; but if you don't want to be "bedevilled" by the Devil himself, then please tell me: where do you think you can you go for relief from His Pestilence?)
Now, now betty, why would I 'hate' you for stating your beliefs?
For in First Reality, the only power that really counts, from "the alpha to the omega" is God's. And what powers we humans have derive from God. IMHO. So go figure.
Indeed, -- and as your last few statements mean little or nothing to me, -- I won't even try to 'figure'.
- Thanks
Please, bb. Give us something quotable--like Cicero.
(p.s. V thought C's writings were hieroglyphic!)
Then you will have no cause for complaint, tpaine, when the "Progressive Left" or some other more "advanced" afficianado of Second Reality strips you of your liberties by tampering with the "law." The secret of Second Reality is that its denizens really do believe that they have the power to establish "laws" that are binding on everyone, regardless of whether "everyone" (or anyone) likes it or not. We call this: Compulsion. Coersion, Tyranny.
God's law, in contrast, is never so complicated, convoluted, or "anti-individual." It is the model of simplicity itself, which says the dignity of the human person, being sacred, may not be violated by any man. Man may do whatever his free will gives scope to -- subject to judgment in due course. Not man's judgment; but God's judgment.
And I have a fairly confident feeling at this point in my spiritual development that God tends to judge man precisely in terms of the kinds of judgments that man renders against his neighbor....
Of course, you do not believe in God. And so this entire conversation is not merely superfluous, but utterly devoid of meaning to you.... (If I had to guess....)
Then you will have no cause for complaint, tpaine, when the "Progressive Left" or some other more "advanced" afficianado of Second Reality strips you of your liberties by tampering with the "law."
My belief in the existence a single reality somehow means I can't object to my enemies violating my rights? Bizarro logic betty.
The secret of Second Reality is that its denizens really do believe that they have the power to establish "laws" that are binding on everyone, regardless of whether "everyone" (or anyone) likes it or not. We call this: Compulsion. Coersion, Tyranny. God's law, in contrast, is never so complicated, convoluted, or "anti-individual." It is the model of simplicity itself, which says the dignity of the human person, being sacred, may not be violated by any man. Man may do whatever his free will gives scope to -- subject to judgment in due course. Not man's judgment; but God's judgment.
You preach to the choir. - I have no objections to your beliefs.
And I have a fairly confident feeling at this point in my spiritual development that God tends to judge man precisely in terms of the kinds of judgments that man renders against his neighbor.... Of course, you do not believe in God. And so this entire conversation is not merely superfluous, but utterly devoid of meaning to you.... (If I had to guess....)
You are guessing betty, - obviously. Just as you are also desperate to find some way to discredit my observation that V. is an intellectual sham.
Truly I am glad to hear it, tpaine. But trust me, my friend -- V. is no "intellectual sham." If he were, believe me, I wouldn't have been reading him for the past 18 years, to my great profit I do believe. I have exactly zero time to invest in shams these days. Capice mi amici?
I can't tell you how sorry I am that you feel that way, maro. I have this eerie feeling that your critique of Voegelin's critique is coming straight out of a Second Reality...where perchance you have chosen to hole yourself up for the duration....
For the record I note you did not engage any point of V's analysis on substance, merit, technical adequacy, evidence, etc. Instead, you went straight for the ad hominum attack.
Where I come from, this usually is considered to be the sign of a weak argument.
You will have anticipated that the answer will be negative. To be sure, a large part of the symbolism has become obsolete, but there is a solid core of truth in it that can be, and must be, salvaged by means of some surgery….
The lover of wisdom always has a face, and this is one of respect. If I had a language . . .
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.