[maro]

I would welcome a short summary. I suspect that it will not be philosophy, a much debased word these days. "Philosophy" does not refer to every way of looking at the world, or to religious views as such (although the existence and nature of God can be philosophical questions). What is philosophy? In some ways, that is the essential philosophical question. Or, as Leibniz put it, why is there something rather than nothing? A philosophical answer to that question is reasoned, and not just a conclusion (e.g., God created the universe; the universe began with a big bang). Reason is a hallmark of true philosophy--not belief or faith. One of the assumptions of reason is that all rational people can argue and debate philosophy. Voegelin appears to negate that basic assumption of rational discourse, and say either that people who disagree are crazy or that they live in an alternate reality. These are self-serving statements, and if widely adopted have the effect of shutting down philosophy, not fostering it. Compare Voegelin to Socrates. Now, I am not a big Socrates fan, especially these days when he has been sainted by some or coopted by others to further their pedophile machinations, but surely Socrates (as presented by Plato) is an archetype of the philosopher. And Socrates held that all people could be taught philosophy, that debate and discourse were possible and desirable.

[betty boop]

And Socrates held that all people could be taught philosophy, that debate and discourse were possible and desirable.

True enough, maro. But Socrates was never able to "teach" the Sophists...presumably because they did not share his "universe of discourse." The great divide between the two "camps" was that the Sophists insisted that "man is the measure of all things" (and thus generally went about telling people exactly what they wanted to hear in "high-blown language," for pay); whereas Socrates believed that the worthy man attunes himself to the divine measure. In many ways, the present dispute, so characteristic of our culture today, is a recapitulation of this most ancient one...and may well come to the same result.

For when the Sophist opponent realized Socrates had "beaten" him in debate, typically he had this nasty habit of going all surly, nasty on him.... That such men had long memories of grievance at the hands of Socrates accounts for the fact that Socrates was tried, convicted, and executed -- preeminently on the testimony of defeated adversaries (e.g., Anytus, Meletus) in debate....

I'll see what I can do about coming up with an "outline," since you express interest (might take me a while, though). Whether it will pass for philosophy, I'll leave it to you to judge.

One thing's for sure, Voegelin is not a "school philosopher," such as, for instance, the German Idealists: Unlike, say, Hegel, or even Kant, he wasn't a "system builder." I really don't know how to classify him -- he's been called a "philosopher of history," and an "historian of philosophy," among other things. I just think of him as a "philosopher of consciousness" or of "open existence" -- which IMHO would place him in the company of Plato, Aristotle, Nietzsche, and Kierkegaard (the latter two each in his own way), for examples.

Thank you for writing, maro.