Letters to the Editor
-
MarijoCook
I have to take issue with your implication that Nietzsche espoused the idea of transcending morality and doing as one pleased. In fact, much of his writing was quite specifically in opposition to that view.
-
But this "noble lie" stuff started way before the neocons
Over the years, "The Republic" has been invoked to justify everything from authoritarian elitism to liberalism, but during the 20th century, neoconservative godfather Leo Strauss reinterpreted it to his own political philosophy, with its controversial assertion that it's OK for the enlightened elite to tell "noble lies" in the service of the Good.
This assertion is hardly controversial. This is how the ONDCP works.
John Walters runs around the country advising parents to tell the "noble lie" to keep their children away from drugs.
But before him, it was Barry McCaffrey doing the hired noble lying, and he was hired by Bill Clinton.
The "noble lie" is the basis of our national cannabis policy.
The War on Drugs has taught us all to be noble liars.
Maybe that's why it was so easy for the neocons to attain power.
That's what I think.
But Salon is a strange place to complain about this. I consider every article printed about PTSD here to be the propagator of a "noble lie."
Yes, it is a "noble lie" to avoid any mention of cannabis from an article on PTSD, since cannabis is in fact the world's oldest and most popular rememdy for PTSD. And scientists have discovered that PTSD is most likely caused by damage to the cannabinoid system.
So it's ironic that you're writing that the "noble lie" is controversial, when you're writing for a publication whose editors believe in noble lying when it supports their own "good" cause.
-
DZ
I'm sorry; I probably should have qualified. It is, however, a possible and perhaps popular reading of Nietzsche to suggest that he advocates "Master" or "Noble" morality. Certainly I am not qualified to say what Nietzsche himself believed. What I learned from him was the way that power can conceal itself behind many different "moral" stories.
-
MarijoCook
I was, perhaps, too quick to pull the trigger, as it were, but much of the popular reading of Nietzsche is based on the posthumous editing and publication by his sister of selected portions of his journals to support her anti-semitic causes. Nietzsche was vehemently opposed to anti-semitism and terminated his friendship with Wagner and others over that issue.
Nietzsche did believe in noble moralities but also believed that all people were capable of achieving them. He did believe that the greatest evil hid behind populist versions of these noble moralities, but he also believed that the populist versions were anything but noble. I can't remember the exact quotation (i'd have to look it up), but something like: Take care that when we search for monsters we don't become monsters ourselves. Not quite the Nietzsche that the popular reading seems to indicate.
-
Plato yoked to Aristotle - the worst of all possible worlds
Articles such as this and the excellent responding letters are what attracts me to Salon. I was particularly impressed by the comparison drawn between Platonic idealism and Aristotlean empiricism. Is it possible that our current national misfortunes can be attributed to the ersatz idealist Bush having been teamed with the Aristotlean, cynical pragmatist, Cheney?
-
The Republic has an overall point.
The discussion laid out in the Republic seeks to answer a specific question: what is justice.
The ideal state that Socrates then constructs is meant to illustrate the answer to that question. It is not meant to be followed as an ideal form of government, and in fact any kind of contingent notion of Justice is discounted very early by Socrates.
The answer that Socrates and friends ultimately come to is that justice exists when reason reigns supreme. I don't think that either Liberals or Conservatives have a lock on that sentiment, nor do I think that either would disavow it.
Along the way, they also say some deep and wonderful things about reason, perception, and the true nature of reality.
-
The thought had occurred to me ...
Excuse me!?
I don't know where you get the idea that the Declaration and Constitution are related, but they are not. The first was a rationale for the severance of the legal bonds with England. It wasn't and has never been law or plan of gov't.
-- JNagarya
Not related, no, as was not the work of the Cincinnatus Societyin from such a narrow frame of reference.
Made it all the way to page 5 without getting caught ...
-
Elitism, Cronyism, and Meritism
The usual problem with elitism is the lack of elites among the elitists. For example, who should head FEMA? A qualified professional? Perhaps the best in the field of disaster management? Is that elitism? Or how about a horse race bookie, or whatever Brownie was, who knows little or nothing about the subject at hand but happens to be connected to the right people? Is that elitism?
Let me say, instead, Cronyism and Meritism. I hope the words' meanings are obvious. Both are types of elitism, the former destructive, the latter not only constructive but outright necessary for most endeavors. Plato was clearly calling for a sort of meritism, and most who site Plato in defense of the indefensible are talking about some type of cronyism.
-
Try Thucydides!
It's worth noting that Plato and Aristotle wrote during the time of Athens' political decline. Thucydides and the tragedians of the previous century probably reflect the spirit of democracy better.
Plato was ferociously anti-democratic, and in that respect I see how the neocons could love him. But BUSH as philosopher-king? I'm sorry that's just too rich. Whether it's utopian or not, Plato expected his republic's leaders to be rigorously trained in virtue, wisdom, dialectic, mathematics, philosophy. Bush could barely hack getting a business degree at a school where everyone knew his dad was a US Senator.
Plato also inveighed against moral degeneration, love of wealth, pride, ambition - and wanted to abolish private property and the family. Of course he was building castles in the sky to give us an idea of justice and the Good, but he couldn't possibly approve of Cheney and co.
-
Plato and The Neo-Conservatives
The city of Athens over-extended itself in taking on Sparta in the Peloponessian War. This was a War based on hubris, and led to the permanent downfall of the Golden Age of Athens. Plato was against this war, as well as the form of government (democracy) that brought it about. After this military fiasco that bled Athens dry, the city became an oligarchy. Remember that in real life, Socrates was not made the philosopher-king; rather he was put to death by the state. If you want to see the current-day Neo-Cons in Plato's Republic, a better place to look is in book six, in which Plato describes a group of mutineers who take over the ship of state, plunder its stores, and take the polis on a "joy ride" from hell.