Submitted by Riley, Feb 20, 2007 13:22

"driven to employ a peculiar manner of writing which would enable them to reveal what they regard as the truth to the few, without endangering the unqualified commitment of the many to the opinions on which society rests." and "the more we cultivate reason, the more we cultivate nihilism." These statements pretty much sum up the character of Straussian philosophy which so rightly receives criticism from the spectrum of thought. In practice of this philosophy, do the self-selected elites decide the 'truth' all on their own, and govern according to the 'truth' without sharing it with the poor undeserving masses? On what basis does a person assert that reason must be abandoned (in favor of nationalism and myth-making) in order to avoid 'nihilism'? To what extent should reason be abandoned in practice, in avoidance of 'nihilism'? There is much to be criticized in Straussian philosophy. But especially, there isd a temendous amount to be criticized about the philosophy as put into practice by Strauss's intelectual disciples. Your pejoritive remarks and ad hominum attacks upon the critics of Strauss, especially those that criticize the practice of enacting Straussian philosophy in government (exemplified in the Bush Administration) reveal the starkness of your own argument. A little less space used attempting to threaten your readers with the specter of the 'Left' might help. Or is it your intention for the sake of political effect to avoid reason in favor of myth-making (as if there were no Republican critics, no critics friom the right, and no left leaning adherents)? --

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.