This essay is extremely provocative in the best kind of way. When Phocaean says that "all philosophers agree," the principle agreement that he identifies is that they all believe the world has a divine origin. And he does this in the context of trying to articulate Leo Strauss's apparent "noble lie" on the difference between the ancient and modern philosophers--an account about which many Straussians say: the ancients were atheists that proved their atheism while the moderns were atheists with insufficient arguments for atheism. I'm very interested to see how this series develops!
Correct. I want to put that Straussian insight into the proper context, and suggest that Straussians call "atheist" is preconditioned by an unnecessary dichotomy.
Was just looking at this one https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2253277 @zetmatist
This essay is extremely provocative in the best kind of way. When Phocaean says that "all philosophers agree," the principle agreement that he identifies is that they all believe the world has a divine origin. And he does this in the context of trying to articulate Leo Strauss's apparent "noble lie" on the difference between the ancient and modern philosophers--an account about which many Straussians say: the ancients were atheists that proved their atheism while the moderns were atheists with insufficient arguments for atheism. I'm very interested to see how this series develops!
Correct. I want to put that Straussian insight into the proper context, and suggest that Straussians call "atheist" is preconditioned by an unnecessary dichotomy.