Teaching Political Science in China: Observations and Suggestions from a Foreign Visitor

Abstract

In responding to the other participants in the Symposium on Plato's Philosophers I attempt to clarify the reasons for, and the results of, my attempt to bring out the interrelations among the dialogues in order to determine what Plato thought. Recognizing that the indications of the dramatic dates of some the dialogues are controversial, I argue that the dates point to an over-arching narrative–the story of the rise, development, and limitations of Socratic philosophy. Plato uses his other philosophers—the Athenian Stranger, Parmenides, Timaeus, and the Eleatic Stranger—to bring out the problems that gave rise to Socratic philosophy and the limitations of his responses. Plato makes Socrates his “hero,” because Socrates provides the best account of the human beings who engage in the search for wisdom. By contrasting him with the other philosophers, Plato dramatizes the insoluble problems that make philosophy always a search for wisdom.     

A Revolution in Plato Scholarship

Abstract

Catherine Zuckert's new book on Plato is a monumental work that should revolutionize Plato scholarship. I argue that its principal claims about ordering Plato's dialogues according to their dramatic chronology and about the development of Socrates in relation to Plato's other philosophers are highly plausible and powerfully presented. The book also makes the case for Socrates as “Plato's hero” whose greatness lies in understanding the human realm of the noble and the good independently of cosmology or metaphysics; and it challenges us to ask if Plato and Catherine Zuckert embrace this model of Socratic philosophy as the highest and happiest way of life.     

Plato's Socrates: One Among Many,but Preeminent

Abstract

Catherine H. Zuckert has written a monumental work on Plato's corpus that offers a new framework for understanding his dialogues. Not only does she trace Plato's presentation of Socrates' development over time, but she also shows how Plato uses other philosophic interlocutors to contribute to his philosophic project. Central themes include Socrates' discovery of erôs, the unity of virtue, and the place of teaching in philosophy, and the relation between intelligible ideas and sensible experience.     

In Praise of Recklessness

Abstract

Catherine Zuckert's Plato's Philosophers argues that the central concern of the Platonic dialogues, read as a single corpus, is to examine the character of philosophy as represented in the activities of five different Platonic characters. The activity of philosophy is most clearly triangulated by showing the advantages and limitations of Socratic philosophy as set against the practices of others laying claim to that title. This article endorses Zuckert's interpretation while raising questions concerning Socrates' eventual philosophic status, the relationship between philosophy and irony, and the standing of philosophy as a social practice.     

On the Degeneration of Public Philosophy in America: Problems and Prospects

Abstract

Mark Blitz’s Plato’s Political Philosophy is reviewed in this article with special attention to two recurring themes. The first is the relation of parts to wholes and, especially, how the knowledge of parts and wholes in general and of political parts and wholes in particular relate to the philosophic attempt to know the whole itself. The second theme is that of philosophy’s relation to piety and, in particular, how the attempt to know the whole, as understood by Blitz, relates to the fundamental opposition between piety and philosophy. Attention to these themes, the author argues, helps to explain peculiarities of Blitz’s approach, especially his greater emphasis on articulating the entire “realm of political philosophy” than on explicating individual dialogues and his tendency to connect and divide Platonic thoughts, themes, and problems rather than to bore into individual Socratic problems.     

Some Thoughts about Standardized Teaching Evaluations

Abstract

Mark Blitz begins his book Plato’s Political Philosophy by making a strong case for Plato’s continuing relevance to us. The book’s three parts are centered on three dialogues of special importance to Blitz’s topic: the Laws, the Republic, and the Statesman. Blitz also pulls into his discussion other dialogues that illuminate the teachings of these three central ones. Blitz’s analyses of the dialogues are illuminating. He lays out the dialogues’ intellectual pathways and gives us an important sense of their meaning. In addition to his examination of particular dialogues, Blitz also gives us rich discussions of four key concepts that underlie and are found throughout Plato’s works: nature, wonder, perplexity, and laughter. The book lacks a deeper discussion of the view that we should be guided by nature in determining our ends. Also missing is a better appreciation of both the challenge posed to philosophy by piety, and the attraction of institutions of modern republics. And we could have a better understanding of the limits of a rational politics in the Statesman. Plato has difficulty finding a place for the philosopher in the city, and this could come through more clearly in Blitz’s account. But these shortcomings are minor when set against the book’s strengths. Its synoptic analyses can help guide those new to Plato. But there is also much here for mature scholars in Blitz’s detailed and careful exploration of Plato’s more important concepts and arguments.     

Cropsey on Plato and the Unity of Philosophy

Abstract

Cropsey's book, Plato's World, contains his longest and most sustained reflections on a set of Platonic dialogues, but it is not the first work he published on Plato or the last he intended to write. His last collection of essays, On Humanity's Intensive Introspection, shows that in his writings on Plato Cropsey was attempting to answer a broader question: What is philosophy?     

The Socratic Teaching of Constructivism: A Reading of Pangle and Ahrensdorf's Justice Among Nations: On the Moral Basis of Power and Peace

Pangle and Ahrensdorf's Justice Among Nations: On the Moral Basis of Power and Peace has become one of the classic studies of international political thought. The account Pangle and Ahrensdorf provide of the Socratics resembles in places the concerns of constructivists, even though they never discuss the international relations theory of constructivism. With this in mind, I argue that their account enables one to glimpse what a Socratic teaching of constructivism might look like. What comes to the surface is that Socratic constructivism shares with contemporary constructivism a concern with rhetoric and the role of ideas, norms, and rules in international politics while nonetheless expressing reservations over the goals of general enlightenment and emancipation that some contemporary constructivists espouse. Instead, Socratic constructivism urges the practice of generosity in the realm of politics, whether domestic or international. This emphasis rests on the Socratic understanding of human nature and suggests that contemporary constructivists tend to expect too much from the human condition. As such, Socratic constructivism seeks to moderate the desire for enlightenment and emancipation through a respect for what is salutary within the moral, religious, and political identities of particular communities.     

Philosophy and Esotericism

Abstract

Arthur Melzer's Philosophy Between the Lines establishes the historical reality of esotericism, or at least the reputation for it, throughout Western and Islamic philosophy until late modernity. But Melzer wants to do much more than that: to establish that there is a whole new world of philosophy to uncover and explore, thus to promote the recovery of “a long lost art of philosophical literacy.” I argue that he fails in this task. Most of the evidence he has for esotericism concerns religious beliefs, and it does not show that a significant portion of the work of important philosophers is to be read esoterically. I offer a detailed analysis of his account of Aristotle's alleged esotericism to give some indication of the weakness of his evidence. I also argue against the Straussian assumption (regarding the dualism of human nature between theory and practice) that stands behind so much of his account of esotericism. I end with a discussion of pedagogical esotericism, contrasting Melzer's Straussian account with my Nietzschean account of what esotericism can contribute to philosophical education.     

Living the Theologico-Political Problem: Leo Strauss on the Common Ground of Philosophy and Theology

Leo Strauss argues that the “theologico-political” problem arose from the competing claims of rationalist philosophy and theology. Although he urges others to take sides in this debate, most theorists see it as insoluble, since it is rooted in competing traditions and different, non-demonstrable, epistemic principles. Strauss, however, argues that there is a common ground capable of sustaining a contest between the two: their appeal to the pre-philosophic understanding of justice as moral virtue. The contest between the Bible and Socratic-Platonic philosophy centers on which of the two better understands what justice is, what completes it, and in what respect it is good. Strauss enables us to see why Plato’s Socratic dialogues became indispensable models for classical and medieval philosophers who sought to meet the challenge of theology on the vital common ground of philosophy and theology.     

Reading What Is Political Philosophy?

Abstract

Leo Strauss is responsible for the revival of political philosophy as a necessary response to the problem of human life. This essay articulates his own summary account of this necessity, the intellectual underpinning of his division of political philosophy into the classical and the modern approahces, and his preference for the former as the natural path leading to the understanding of man's political situation.     

The body speaks Italian: Giuseppe Liceti and the conflict of philosophy and medicine in the Renaissance

Giuseppe Liceti (d. 1599) has been entirely forgotten in the history of philosophy. This article seeks to demonstrate that Liceti’s two vernacular dialogues are crucial sources for understanding the Renaissance debate on the conflict between medicine and philosophy. Liceti’s main dialogue, La nobiltà (1590), stages a contest about the nobility of the main bodily organs, which I discuss by placing it in its medical and literary context. I then proceed to expounding Liceti’s interpretation of the conflict between Galenism and Aristotelianism, and trace the specific topic of the seat of rationality in the body. In the conclusion I claim that the outcome of the contest in La nobiltà is not as obvious as it might seem, and that Liceti implies an alternative conclusion to the “official” one. This opens up a different scenario with regard to the interpretation of human uniqueness from medical and philosophical points of view.     

Proëmial Prolepsis in Plato's Politeia

A recently proposed proleptic, or anticipatory reading of the Platonic dialogues insufficiently modifies the conventional doctrinal-developmental reading of these. Fuller literary consideration of the way Republic 1 anticipates the following books suggests how a genuine appreciation of a principle previously applied to Aeschylean drama invites deeper re-assessment both of Plato's philosophical manner of writing and of his political philosophy.     

MOVING BEYOND BIOPOWER: HARDT AND NEGRI'S POST-FOUCAULDIAN SPECULATIVE PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY

I argue in this paper that the attempt by Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri in Empire and Multitude to “theorize empire” should be read both against the backdrop of speculative philosophy of history and as a development of the conception of a “principle of intelligibility” as this is discussed in Michel Foucault's recently published courses at the Collège de France. I also argue that Foucault's work in these courses (and elsewhere) can be read as implicitly providing what I call “prolegomena to any future speculative philosophy of history.” I define the latter as concerned with the intelligibility of the historical process considered as a whole. I further suggest, through a brief discussion of the classical figures of Kant, Hegel, and Marx, that the basic features of speculative philosophy of history concern the articulation of both the telos and dynamics of history. My claim is that Hardt and Negri provide an account of the telos and dynamics of history that respects the strictures imposed on speculative philosophy of history by Foucault's work, and thus can be considered as providing a post‐Foucauldian speculative philosophy of history. In doing so, they provide a challenge to other “theoretical” attempts to account for our changing world.     

Intersections between philosophy and art: expressions of immanence in the seventeenth century — Spinoza and Vermeer*

ABSTRACT

Spinoza's philosophy of immanence represents a turning point that radically changed our conception of human agency and its relation to infinity. Hans Blumenberg rightly called the principle of immanence “a general hypothesis of the epoch”, a principle that applies to philosophy no less than to the sciences and arts in the seventeenth century. This article looks at Dutch paintings by drawing parallels between Spinoza's philosophy and Vermeer's work. Spinoza and Vermeer both deny a dualistic conception of the world and a hierarchical structure between inner and outer spheres. With the example of Vermeer's painting the Milkmaid, this article shows how an analysis of light and colour, time and space, reveal a vision of immanent infinity, with the human agent at its centre.     

Stewart,Kant, and the Reworking of Common Sense

Summary

Dugald Stewart was the first metaphysician of any significance in Britain who attempted to take account of Kantian philosophy, although his analysis appears generally dismissive. Traditionally this has been imputed to Stewart's poor understanding of Kant and to his efforts to defend the orthodoxy of common sense. This paper argues that, notwithstanding Stewart's reading, Kant's philosophy helped him in a reconsideration and reassessment of common sense philosophy. In his mature works—the Philosophical Essays (1810), the second volume of the Elements of the Philosophy of the Human Mind (1814), and the second part of his historical ‘Dissertation? (1815–1821)—Stewart's analysis of Kantian philosophy is far from being uniform. In the first two works, he takes a cautious approach to transcendentalism, showing some interest in the challenge it might represent for common sense; in the last, he turns to rash criticism. This change may appear confusing and inconsistent unless considered in the light of a precise ‘nationalistic’ strategy. In fact, once Stewart had taken from Kantian philosophy what he deemed useful for his own aims, he eventually dismissed it in order to show that his reworked version of common sense was the most original and most consistent outcome of the whole Anglo-Scottish philosophical tradition.     

Homeric Resonances

Abstract

This “Homeric” appreciation of Catherine Zuckert's Plato's Philosophers focuses on the significance of the revised chronology for reading the Platonic dialogues and how this changes the conventional understanding of the relation between Plato and Socrates: Plato become Socrates' biographer, not his replacement.     

1. THE DEFINING CHARACTER OF CHINESE HISTORICAL THINKING1

Imbued with profound historical consciousness, the Chinese people are Homo historiens in every sense of the term. To be human in China, to a very large extent, is to be historical, which means to live up to the paradigmatic past. Therefore, historical thinking in traditional China is moral thinking. The Chinese historico‐moral thinking centers around the notion of Dao, a notion that connotes both Heavenly principle and human norm. In view of its practical orientation, Chinese historical thinking is, on the one hand, concrete thinking and, on the other, analogical thinking. Thinking concretely and analogically, the Chinese people are able to communicate with the past and to extrapolate meanings from history. In this way, historical experience in China becomes a library in which modern readers may engage in creative dialogues with the past.     

Yoram Hazony and Leo Strauss on the Relation between Philosophy and Revelation

This essay challenges Yoram Hazony's ostensible correction of Leo Strauss's account of the tension between philosophy and revelation in Hazony's book The Philosophy of Hebrew Scripture. While Hazony persuasively demonstrates the value of the Hebrew Bible, notably the half that he calls the “History of Israel,” as a work of rational political theory, emphasizing the difference in function between the Torah and the Christian “New Testament” (which serves chiefly to “bear witness” to particular events, rather than account for the permanent character of human and political life), he wrongly accuses Strauss of sharing the position of the radically antiphilosophic Christian theologian Tertullian that the Bible and classical philosophy are “absolutely oppos[ed],” even though Strauss, unlike Tertullian, takes the side of philosophy rather than the Bible in this conflict. Contrary to the impression Hazony conveys, Strauss readily acknowledged that the believer, no less than the philosopher, is obliged to make use of reason in his quest for truth and noted the critical areas of agreement between the Torah and classical philosophy. He simply emphasized the conflict between philosophy's reliance on reason as the ultimate guide to truth and the dependence of the Bible on belief in divine revelation, a dependence that Hazony implausibly seems to deny. And Hazony's challenge to the very distinction between reason and revelation threatens to weaken our appreciation of both sides of this tension, which Strauss identified as the source of the West's “vitality.”