What Can We Learn from Political Philosophy? – Detailed Study Notes

Lecture Context and Metadata

  • Delivered: General Seminar of the New School Summer Course, July 1942 (typescripts later printed in The Review of Politics 69 [2007], pp. 515–529)
  • Author/Lecturer: Leo Strauss
  • Editorial adjustments in printed version: punctuation, spacing, paragraph indentation unified; Strauss’s own typo-corrections not tracked; various handwritten insertions/cross-outs preserved in footnotes.
  • Key recurring shorthand:
    • “K.M.T.” joke = Churchill’s “Keep Muddling Through” policy label.
    • Greek verb "θεωρέω" (to look/behold), source of “theory.”
    • French Comte note: « Science, d’où prévoyance ; prévoyance, d’où action » (science → foresight → action).

Terminology Debate: “Political Theory” vs “Political Philosophy”

  • Strauss dislikes “political theory,” prefers “political philosophy.”
  • Two disputed implications of the word theory:
    1. Implies purely theoretical, detached knowledge of politics is possible (denies old division of sciences into theoretical vs practical).
    • Classical scheme: mathematics & natural science = theoretical; ethics, economics, politics = practical.
    • Using “political theory” tacitly rejects this classical split.
    1. Modern usage treats theory as essentially hypothetical explanation of observed data ("my theory" ≈ arbitrary conjecture) ⇒ divorces theory from observation.
    • Original Greek meaning unites viewing & contemplating; no such divorce.
  • Thus Strauss retains “political philosophy”: coherent, truth-oriented reflection on political life, setting right standards of judgment.
    • Political philosophy = subset of political thought; not all political thought is philosophy (example: Nazi ideas ≠ political philosophy because they shun truth & reflection).

Central Guiding Question

"What can we learn from political philosophy?"

Initial Skeptical Case (3-step ‘negative’ argument)

  1. Non-existence / Plurality

    • Many rival political philosophies; at most one true → layman can’t know which.
    • Philosophy, by definition, still seeks truth; fundamental questions remain unsolved (“anarchy of the systems”).
    • Therefore philosophy seems unsafe as a guide to action.

  2. Practical Superfluity

    • Successful political actors rely on practical wisdom (“horse sense”), not philosophy.
    • Churchill anecdote (Wells asks his program → “K.M.T. policy” = keep muddling through) illustrates pragmatic improvisation.
    • Current war strategy example: necessities (defeat Axis, maintain Anglo-Saxon–Russian entente, keep armed vigilance, etc.) obvious to thinkers of divergent philosophies, suggesting philosophy unnecessary for framing them.

  3. Ineffectuality Even If True

    • Even possessing a correct philosophy might not change events (microbe killing Hitler could matter more).
    • Historical pattern: concepts appear as by-products of pre-existing political relations (citing C. H. McIlwain; Hegel’s “owl of Minerva” flies at dusk).
    • Examples: mixed constitutions pre-existed theorists; Montesquieu’s separation of powers reflects 1701 Act of Settlement; Alexander the Great affected history more than Aristotle’s prescriptions—and contradicted them.

Authority-Based Counter-Impulse

  • Great thinkers (Plato → philosopher-king ideal; Aristotle) believed philosophy necessary for right order.
  • Pascal’s sarcastic comment on Plato/Aristotle writing politics "as if organizing an insane asylum" still concedes some utility.

Practical Need Regardless of Skepticism

  • Reasonable post-war policy requires grasping limits of human nature to fend off over-generous/utopian appeals.
    • Political philosophy becomes defensive weapon vs. dangerous teachings (parallels: Zeno → motion proofs; Plato vs Sophists; early-modern toleration vs religious zealotry).
  • Hence philosophy at minimum = political apologetics preserving sensible practice.

Distinct Contribution Unique to Philosophy – Natural Law / Natural Right

  • Concept arises only with philosophy; hinges on discovery of "nature" (φύσις):
    • Nature ≠ convention/law (nomos). Natural things same everywhere; conventions vary.
    • Leads to idea of a universally valid order limiting arbitrariness, critiquing inherited opinions (“We seek the good, not the old” – Aristotle, extPolitics<br/>1269aext{Politics}<br /> 1269a).
  • Consequences:
    • Philosophy becomes inherently anti-traditional, eternal challenge to philistinism.
    • Introduces legitimate utopianism → search for best “constitution” aligned with nature; an object of εὐχή (wish/prayer), not prediction.
    • Perfect order guides judgment but realization depends on chance; demands equity/charity to supplement imperfect legal justice.
    • Generates genre of mirrors of princes: moral exhortations to rulers.

Modern Turning-Point: Machiavelli

  • Rejects exhortation; studies how men do act, teaches princes efficient wickedness.
  • Spurs later thinkers to lower moral standards yet still instruct: reconcile common good with self-interest → enlightened self-interest doctrine.
    • Hope: universal enlightenment → automatic harmony, minimal need for force.

Critique of Modern Utopianism

  • Flaws in enlightened self-interest theory:
    • Desire vs Interest: strongest desires may conflict with long-term interest; mere prudential appeals lack moral "sting" (duty, honor).
    • Ascetic Premise Evaded: Classical view—only universal asceticism (pursuit of necessities) guarantees harmony; moderns rehabilitate luxury & elevate standard-of-living as end.
    • Forces of Evil Ignored: power-seekers exploit propaganda, overpower rational persuasion.
    • Economism: reduction of political facts to economic facts ("power goes with property").
    • Progression → Marxist “economic interpretation of history.”
    • Marx’s slogan on changing the world substitutes mutable historical process for eternal whole; expecting perfect, yet perishable, social order = utopian.
    • Frustration–Aggression Fallacy: assumes all aggression stems from removable want; but frustration is inescapable—full satisfaction impossible.

Hegelian Apex of Utopianism

  • Hegel collapses distinction of ideal & real: “the rational is actual, the actual rational.”
  • Contrasts sharply with classical insistence on their gulf.

Political Philosophy’s Enduring Tasks

  • Counteract spurious utopianism, remind of permanent limitations, ever-present dangers.
  • Teach difficulty of achieving minimum decency, humanity, justice; thus foster:
    • Modest hopes → protection from despondency.
    • Immunity to philistine smugness and to visionary dreams.
  • Fortifies common sense, which alone is vulnerable to extremes.

Contemporary Policy Implications (WWII Context)

  • Realistic goal: lay foundations for a peace of perhaps two generations, not abolish war.
  • Choice often between "tolerably decent" (Anglo-Saxon) vs "intolerably indecent" (Axis) imperialisms.
  • Necessity of enduring armed vigilance; power cannot be discarded without inviting gangsters.

Literary & Historical Illustrations

  • Churchill vs Wells dialogue; Singapore & Libya defeats; Japanese generals and Rommel not philosophers.
  • Hegel’s owl; Shakespeare references:
    • Henry VI Pt 3 – Edward IV: “here begins our lasting joy” (naïve optimism).
    • Richard III – Henry VII: “peace lives again… God say amen!” (prudent hope).
  • Hallam quote on policy as medicine: inevitable “intrinsic decay” of institutions.

Final Philosophical Choice

  • Tangible, man-made eternal peace “non datur.”
  • We must choose between:
    1. Philosophy – love of stern fate, sub specie aeternitatis.
    2. Bible – reliance on divine mercy.
  • Both demand acceptance of limits; both bridle cynical despair.

Take-Home Lessons & Significance

  • Political philosophy offers:
    • Conceptual legacy of natural right to judge regimes.
    • Permanent reminder of human finitude and imperfection.
    • Intellectual defense of moderate, non-utopian reforms.
    • Moral education: fusing justice with prudence, urging equity beyond law yet respecting law’s necessity.
  • It is indispensable whenever over-optimistic doctrines threaten realistic, humane policy.