On saving the life of philosophy—or is it? [Wrtn April 5-6.]

Philosophy Forums Philosophy
1

In his “Restatement on Xenophon’s Hiero”, Leo Strauss assays “to explain the philosopher’s desire to communicate his thoughts”. In order to do so in a satisfying manner, he entertains “the assumption […] that the well-ordered soul is more akin to the eternal order, or to the eternal cause or causes of the whole, than is the chaotic soul”:

“[T]he souls of men reflect the eternal order in different degrees. A soul that is in good order or healthy reflects it to a higher degree than a soul that is chaotic or diseased. The philosopher who as such has had a glimpse of the eternal order is therefore particularly sensitive to the difference among human souls. In the first place, he alone knows what a healthy or well-ordered soul is. And secondly, precisely because he has had a glimpse of the eternal order, he cannot help being intensely pleased by the aspect of a healthy or well-ordered soul […]. Hence he cannot help being attached to men of well-ordered souls: he desires ‘to be together’ with such men all the time. […] Last but not least, he is highly sensitive to the promise of good or ill order, or of happiness or misery, which is held out by the souls of the young. Hence he cannot help desiring […] that those among the young whose souls are by nature fitted for it, acquire good order of their souls. But the good order of the soul is philosophizing.” (Strauss, What Is Political Philosophy?, page 121. The previous quotes are from page 122.)

Now in his new book (from March 16th), Lampert writes:

“Without the actions of a Socrates this thing of highest worth, human understanding of nature and human nature, could perish with his perishing. The hero of the Phaedo [Plato’s dialogue on Socrates’ last day] is a philosopher-ruler in action, acting on behalf of philosophy[.]” (Lampert, How Socrates Became Socrates, pp. 30-31.)

This “acting on behalf of philosophy” is what political philosophy, or more precisely philosophic politics, really is. But is it really wise? As Strauss again says, “the political action of the philosophers on behalf of philosophy has achieved full success. One sometimes wonders whether it has not been too successful.” (WIPP, page 127.) It has especially been too successful in leading, both directly and indirectly (through Judaism: Judaism as we know it was chiefly modelled on Plato’s Laws), to Christianity; and by leading, through modern philosophy (which in its inception was simply a reaction against the excesses of Christianity), to the imminent end of the Holocene… So shouldn’t philosophers refrain from taking action against such threats? Even if those actions should today consist in resetting mankind to its pre-Socratic conditions? Wouldn’t their actions make things even worse, again, in the long run?

“The [historical] recurrence or return does not necessarily require an external continuity between the cycles, or that some of phase 5 [the final and highest phase] be actually remembered, even vaguely, and be expressed in myth in phase 2 of the next cycle. Phase 5 may be completely forgotten or lost. But it will be rediscovered. What is necessary is the continuous existence of the two sources of men’s thought about the gods: the experiences of the soul and the phenomena of the heavens. […] Necessity, human nature, the experience of the soul, and the phenomena of the heavens give every cycle a definite beginning, direction, and end—which is philosophy [… and which] will be followed by an age of darkness, but an age of darkness that will be the beginning of new cycles and new movements that will end again (at least in some cases [i.e., if the cycle does not end prematurely, before phase 5]) in a philosophic phase.” (Mahdi, Alfarabi and the Foundation of Islamic Political Philosophy, page 234.)

Shouldn’t Socrates, and later Machiavelli, have allowed philosophy to perish with their perishing? And shouldn’t I, in our times? Or should I now act precisely with a view to making philosophy (natural philosophy, science) perish…

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERJORQ1BbKY[/youtube] Filami, “Bioluminescence”

2

Isn’t this antithetical to Dionysus?

What are you talking about here exactly?

Are you about to murder?

3

No, because the chaos mentioned here is not khaos but tarakhe (or tarache). I take Strauss’s “eternal order” to be an exoteric name for khaos, that is to say the Abyss, shunyata, light-space, zeroth nature.

No, I’m wondering aloud whether I should do anything at all in that regard (even if it’s to reset mankind to its pre-Socratic conditions, i.e., to make (Socratic) philosophy perish). Should the answer to my last question be yes, though, then the following applies:

79335668_2586102108109714_5335506553195724800_nILP.jpg
79335668_2586102108109714_5335506553195724800_nILP.jpg1595×2000 254 KB

4

“The weak and the botched shall perish: first principle of our charity. And one should help them to it.”

Platonism is clearly the philosophy of the botched. Socates was botchedness incarnate; I see him as the ultimate urban hero. Urban as in yo man yo, vet urban gast. Socates was a “player”.

Please do rid us of him if you can.

HAIL POSEIDON

5

Dunno if it’s the shroom tea I drank, but I feel mighty cold. I miss my hair. I can understand how welcoming a warm wall of sound is, but I have mostly just music left that begins from darkness—silence—[…]. Most of it is from times, or cultures, that didn’t believe in a cold darkness encompassing everything. They believed in a God, yes; but just look where Machiavellian science has led us—and not just us! Wonderful species,—but let me interrupt myself before I go off on misanthrophy and self-loathing… I only recently discovered that homo sapiens is genetically closer to rats than to cats, say—though on some level I already knew, knowing as I did that our ancestor among the dinosaurs was some kind of treeshrew, I think. Anyway, when kinsmen were eaten by big cats or other natural disasters struck them, most people had a faith. (This message started off as an IM, by the way, but I copied it to an email so it will be saved.) Machiavelli changed all that, and he was a great philosopher! a great mind, and this is meant as the highest praise; but he could not foresee what his enterprise has led to. Now I’d recently been thinking I should probably begin my own enterprise with Renaissance music—everyone likes the Renaissance, right?—but you never commented on the music I sent you, which I’m pretty sure means you didn’t like it… (As it happens, my MP3-player is shuffling past a certain song right now, which I’ll include—Sephardic Jews. [Les Jongleurs de la Mandragore, “Rahelica Baila”.] I love to dance to it at the end of my workout and leave my neighbours guessing what the Hell is going on there!)

I should probably leave it at this, except for everything I said about Dionysus and Ariadne. I think if even you don’t like the tune I’m playing here, the earth is in dire straits indeed. Speaking of dire straits, I was recently reminded of the song “Telegraph Road”—which I still haven’t listened to since then, I guess I should so now—by yet another song, whose organ reminded me of The Doors; it’s the only “normal” song on my MP3-player right now:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylP7rlfoWPc[/youtube] The Animals, “House of the Rising Sun”

This song is perhaps even more fondly remembered from my childhood than The Doors. I was playing Mafia 3 recently and it was on the radio… That may not be a very good game [isn’t it?], but it sure as Hell is great art, in the sense of a great introduction (you should play the free demo to the end)! I just stopped my car where I was, by this motel—which looked quite psychedelic through the rain!—, and I just took* the song’s duration to take it all in. (The asterisk marks where my computer crashed. I’ve also had to replace my keyboard and my earphones in writing all this. Now I’m going to eat—Kung Pao duck.)

::

The reason I ordered Mafia 3 and GTA 5, which I haven’t played since that last trip by the way, was the great fun I’d had with L.A. Noire on my Nintendo Switch at work (especially driving as recklessly as possible). Its 1940s L.A. atmosphere is really good. I ordered Mafia 3 because it was like that: 1960s New Orleans, but still. But long before that game arrived (there were problems with my order, I should have bought it from a slightly more expensive seller), I ordered and received GTA 5 for PS4 (I’d played it on Xbox 360, but on PS4 it has a first-person view option). The first time I played that, it was the day after a trip, and I was deeply struck by its ignobility. Well, 2010s L.A., what else would you expect, right? But it was really bad, even before I’d unlocked the upper (middle) class character, let alone the white-trash one (still haven’t unlocked him). Those ghetto “niggas” with their hiphop lifestyle—as if that was cool, as if that wasn’t utterly loathsome… Having played the Mafia 3 demo to the end, it seemed to me black Americans had actually sunk in a crucial respect since the 1960s! I’m reminded of Nietzsche:

“The value of a thing sometimes does not lie in that which one attains by it, but in what one pays for it—what it costs us. I shall give an example. Liberal institutions cease to be liberal as soon as they are attained: later on, there are no worse and no more thorough injurers of freedom than liberal institutions. Their effects are known well enough: they undermine the will to power; they level mountain and valley, and call that morality; they make men small, cowardly, and hedonistic—every time it is the herd animal that triumphs with them. Liberalism: put plainly, herd-animalization… These same institutions produce quite different effects while they are still being fought for; then they really promote freedom in a powerful way. On closer inspection it is war that produces these effects, the war for liberal institutions, which, as war, permits the illiberal instincts to continue.” (Twilight of the Idols, “Skirmishes of an Untimely Man”, aphorism 38.)

The camera, too, is ignoble: it moves around reality TV-style, as if it were operated by some wigger who was just one of the “cool” guys he was filming… It shakes like mad. […]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bW75OwVXZI[/youtube] L.A. Noire title theme

6

I remember when Arie and Tofik were playing GTA 3 in my room and laughing like hyenas while clubbing some old lady, I ejected the disc and snapped it in half before their marveling eyes, dropped the the remains and sat back down feeling like I had just bathed after years of acquiring dirt. I never did enjoy 3d gaming precisely for the reason that it gave rise to such tremendously ignoble scenes. Clearly not all 3d games are ignoble but the power to make ignoble material increased a thousand fold and it wasn’t left unused.

“The value of a thing sometimes does not lie in that which one attains by it, but in what one pays for it—what it costs us.”

I have here a clip by Sam Hyde, where he talks about precisely this - the price of hiphop -
youtu.be/QEUTSEBApkY?t=1132

It starts off with what must be one of the most atrociously ignoble displays in human history. That is it starts off showcasing the human species after the price has been paid.

7

This is a nicely written piece though.

8

I’ont even know y u mess with that grand theft auto nonsense, ZN.

You belong with me and my team… in the warzone…

Set waypoint for drop and aquire a primary weapon. I’ll be waiting (dude with the red mask).

checks watch