Political Philosophy and Ethics discussion

Rebecca Newberger Goldstein has recently published an excellent book entitled Plato at the Googleplex: Why Philosophy Won't Go Away (New York: Pantheon Books, 2014). Among other things, Goldstein explores in depth the Socratic-Platonic view of ethics. I have reviewed this book here.

6/20/2018 NOTE:

Unlike Aristotle, who had separate treatments of ethics and politics, Plato's dialogues often address both ethical and political questions in the same work. The same could be said of Xenophon's writings on Socrates (though we have not yet established a separate topic on Xenophon). Accordingly, my decision, four years ago, to start the present separate thread on the ethical philosophy of Socrates and Plato may not have been wise. Since, however, several comments have already been posted in the present topic, I will not delete it. I would point out that the Plato topic in the political philosophy folder contains discussions of both ethical and political philosophy in Plato's works.

Alan,

I had not read Professor Goldstein's recent book, but hearing her speak about it in an NPR interview not long ago prompted me to put up a short blog post in favor of her (apparent) primary claim of the enduring relevance of philosophy. I will take a look at the book!

Thanks for your efforts in reviewing it here. I was especially interested in your comments about Rand and Rothbard, neither of whom I have been able to take seriously. I will give this more thought.

Regards,

Randal

Thanks, Randall, for your comment and for joining my new group. Your blog post hits the nail on the head. I must confess that I was a bit seduced by libertarian theory (especially the principle of noninitiation of force) in an earlier life, but the years of the George W. Bush administration--especially the obeisance to the Religious Right, the Iraq War, and the events leading to the Great Recession--cured me forever of any such notion. For about two decades, I had been too preoccupied with the time-consuming demands of my career as an attorney to have time to think carefully about political theory--or, indeed, political philosophy, which had been my main interest as a student. But the events of the 2000s shook me out of my complacency, and I have especially had more time to consider such matters since my retirement in 2012.

I had almost completed a post on David Hume and Jefferson/Madison this afternoon, but I was composing it online instead of in a Word document (which I had earlier sworn I would never do again), and I accidentally hit the "enter" key, which caused the whole thing to disappear into cyberspace. I may attempt to recreate it and post it on this site later.

Best,

Alan

In rereading my preceding post, I find that it is not quite accurate. Many libertarians opposed the Iraq War, and most if not all libertarians support the separation of church and state. So those issues were not reasons I departed from libertarianism as such. Rather, they were reasons I disagreed with conservatism (I had never, except perhaps for a brief period in the late 1960s/early 1970s, been a conservative, and I never was a Religious Right conservative). My disenchantment with libertarianism as such had to do with its impracticability, especially in today's world, as I discuss at greater length in my review of Goldstein's book. Additionally, following the 2008 financial debacle, I read a number of books on the causes of the crash and ensuing Great Recession and became convinced that the free market was not always rational and that properly formulated government regulation of the financial system and other parts of the economy is necessary. The best of these books—which criticized some Democratic policies as well as Republican policies—was All the Devils are Here: The Hidden History of the Financial Crisis by Bethany McLean and Joe Nocera (New York: Penguin, 2011). I highly recommend this book. See also Justin Fox's The Myth of the Rational Market: A History of Risk, Reward, and Delusion on Wall Street (New York: HarperCollins, 2009).

Alan wrote: " Additionally, following the 2008 financial debacle, I read a number of books on the causes of the crash and ensuing Great Recession and became convinced that the free market was not always rational and that properly formulated government regulation of the financial system and other parts of the economy is necessary."

Alan,

My favorite of the post-2008 books by far (although I haven't read the ones you mention) would be Yanis Varoufakis's book The Global Minotaur, which is his solo book covering the same ground as the second part of his broader co-authored book of economic theory, Modern Political Economics. I reviewed MPE on my blog in 2011. MPE contains a critique of all of the major schools of economic thinking, including the most radical laissez-faire school of the Austrians. The Global Minotaur tells a "story behind the story" that is not considered much in the US media / academia.

Another good little book summarizing Keynes's critique of laissez-faire is by Paul Davidson, The Keynes Solution, of which I gave a short review on Goodreads here. There are a ton of books on critical economic theory, of course. For a specific critique of laissez-faire, my favorite would be Polanyi's classic, The Great Transformation, which I have also reviewed on my blog. Polanyi gives the classic critique of libertarian thinking in economics. I discuss his engagement with the Austrian libertarian von Mises during the thirties briefly in my review.

Bad Samaritans by Chang Ha-joon is also a short read and one of my favorites. I have reviewed that here.

So many books. So little time.

Randal

Randal, your comments and reviews are outstanding. This deserves a new topic thread of its own. I am continuing this conversation about political economy in the new topic Government and the Economy.

See also posts 86-118 passim in the Aristotle's Metaphysics topic of the Philosophy Group.

"What did Socrates mean by his Daemon? He was too wise to believe, and too honest to pretend that he had real and familiar converse with a superior and invisible being. He probably considered the suggestions of his conscience, or reason, as revelations, or inspirations from the Supreme mind, bestowed, on important occasions, by a special superintending providence."

Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, October 12, 1813, in The Adams-Jefferson Letters: The Complete Correspondence between Thomas Jefferson and Abigail and John Adams, ed. Lester J. Cappon (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1959), 385.

What Thomas Jefferson and other deistic Founders meant by "providence" is not entirely clear.

Message 4 - Alan - about your disenchantment of libertarianism - the free market was not always rational and that properly formulated government regulation of the financial system and other parts of the economy is necessary - you conclude this based on crony capitalism and not in free market capitalism!! something is wrong with applied capitalism today - nutrition, health and education are goods and services not free market regulated, but biological needs. Labour is a process of energy transformation - from human to physical or intelectual - that´s the reason they must be assured "a Priori". Think about this new concept. Free market is the only and right solution for human development in society - we need a new Social Pact where nutrition, health and education be part of job contract and government reduce tax system correspondent. Regards. Ron Carneiro

Ronaldo wrote: "Message 4 - Alan - about your disenchantment of libertarianism - the free market was not always rational and that properly formulated government regulation of the financial system and other parts ..."

Ron, I am redirecting this discussion to the Classical Liberalism; Libertarianism and Anarchocapitalism; Objectivism topic, where it more accurately belongs. I will respond there in a few minutes.

Hallo, Platonists' Camp!

Any interest in Plotinus or Proclus, around these here parts?

Plotinus is great -> but from my standpoint almost impossible to find a decent translation in English... I've read him in German... so.... if you can't read Greek or German, there will be a lot missing. I'd suggest concentrate on really understanding Plato - - where a similar problem exists but perhaps is mitigated by yours truly....

good luck! - - Phillip Lundberg.
http://home.earthlink.net/~ushaphil/i...
****

THE LIFE OF REASON VERSUS THE LIFE OF PASSION

I discuss the question of the life of reason versus the life of passion in my book Reason and Human Ethics, especially Chapter 2 (“Human Reason”), which is posted online at https://www.academia.edu/82835731/Exc....

Political philosopher Thomas Pangle recently posted an essay titled “The Life of Wisdom: Rousseau vs Socrates” at https://www.academia.edu/91657830/The.... He contrasts the life of reason, exemplified by Socrates, with the life of passion, exemplified by Rousseau. This is an excellent analysis, which I highly recommend. My only question is his discussion of Socrates's statements about his daimonion. I have always thought that these statements were exoteric, a position with which Pangle may or may not agree. I have posed that question to him in an Academia discussion. If he responds, I will update the present comment.

I am cross-filing this post in the following topics of this Goodreads group: “Reason, Informal Logic, Evidence, and Critical Thinking,” “Human Ethics: Basis, Principles, Applications,” “Ethical Philosophy of Socrates and Plato,” “Plato,” “Rousseau,” and “Leo Strauss and the ‘Straussians’.”

Alan wrote: Political philosopher Thomas Pangle recently posted an essay titled “The Life of Wisdom: Rousseau vs Socrates” at https://www.academia.edu/91657830/The.... He contrasts the life of reason, exemplified by Socrates, with the life of passion, exemplified by Rousseau. This is an excellent analysis, which I highly recommend. My only question is his discussion of Socrates's statements about his daimonion. I have always thought that these statements were exoteric, a position with which Pangle may or may not agree. I have posed that question to him in an Academia discussion. If he responds, I will update the present comment."

Professor Pangle responded today as follows: “I don't think the statements about his daimonion are simply exoteric, though that is one dimension of them. They point to the fundamental problem or question, which is one of interpreting crucial spiritual experiences.” I’m not sure what Pangle means by this, but I am not pursuing it further in the Academia discussion.

I am cross-filing this post in the following topics of this Goodreads group: “Reason, Informal Logic, Evidence, and Critical Thinking,” “Human Ethics: Basis, Principles, Applications,” “Ethical Philosophy of Socrates and Plato,” “Plato,” “Rousseau,” and “Leo Strauss and the ‘Straussians’.”

Not sure if the following ever appeared before in this group.

But it's a comic strip featuring great thinkers.

https://existentialcomics.com/philoso...

There are some existentialists included on the site but there's also many illustrations devoted to our favorite Greeks like Plato and Aristotle.

A keyword search will bring them up. The link above jumps to Socrates. Enjoy!

Just a fun graphic past-time, but one which could help keep us mindful towards ethical or political topics.

Feliks wrote: "Not sure if the following ever appeared before in this group.

But it's a comic strip featuring great thinkers.

https://existentialcomics.com/philoso...

There are some existentialists ..."

Socrates was executed as a result, among other things, of the exaggerations and misrepresentations of him by the comic poet Aristophanes. See Plato's Apology of Socrates and Aristophanes's Clouds. See also Leo Strauss's book Socrates and Aristophanes. These cartoons appear to be continuing the Aristophanean tradition.

how would you define ethics

Sergej wrote: "how would you define ethics"

My full answer to that question is set forth in my book Reason and Human Ethics, a PDF replica of the paperback of which is freely accessible and downloadable at https://www.academia.edu/107899091/Re... Reason and Human Ethics is also available in both Kindle and paperback editions on Amazon.

My very short answer to this question is that ethics is when reason (both noninstrumental and instrumental reason) supervises spiritedness (courage and temperament) and desire (human needs and wants) in the individual human being—both with respect to the individual qua individual and with respect to the individual qua other human beings. This is the Platonic formulation in the Republic. I explain its many ramifications and applications in Reason and Human Ethics, which I regard as my most important work.

As to the question whether the Republic sets forth a correct political philosophy, I follow the view of Leo Strauss (with whom I do not agree on all matters) that the Republic does not set forth the best political order but rather shows the nature of human political life as we know it. My own view of political philosophy is set forth in the epilogue to Reason and Human Ethics and in my forthcoming book Reason and Human Government.

Alan wrote: "ethics --spiritedness - desire --" (my encapsulation

I can't locate the famous diagram online to present here for review, but I remember being very much struck by Northrop Frye's depiction of the Greek mind.

If I recall correctly --in his schema --the tripartite divisions were: Thought, Judgment, & Will.

Been wanting to raise this to attention for a long time. Always wondered why it seemed to differ from Plato.

His discourse is found in an early chapter in his, The Great Code: The Bible and Literature.

Leo Strauss's Socrates and Aristophanes is currently $4.99 in Kindle.
https://www.amazon.com/Socrates-Arist...

I have also posted this with another Strauss book under "Strauss and the 'Straussians'"

For a look at moral thought in another Greek tradition, in part contemporaneous with Socrates and Plato: Lisa Irene Hau’s Moral History from Herodotus to Diodorus Siculus (Edinburgh University Press, 2016, 484 pages) Is on Kindle at $3.70.
https://www.amazon.com/Moral-History-...

Also on sale is the fairly recent translation of Herodotus by Tom Holland, The Histories (Penguin Classics Deluxe) by Herodotus(May 19, 2015) Paperback $4.99 in Kindle.
https://www.amazon.com/Moral-History-...

This replaced the several revised editions of the old Aubrey de Selincourt translation for Penguin Classics, on which I grew up. The introduction, by Paul Cartledge, is very readable. I have not yet got much the translation itself. There are terse notes, and 13 maps, the utility of which will depend on your screen.