Treść książki
Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
WhyLeoStrauss?FourAnswersandOneConsideration...
21
namelythatthephilosophersofthepastwroteunderconditionsofcensorship
andpersecution–evenifthiswasbynomeanstheonlyreasonwhytheyavailed
themselvesoftheexoteric-esotericdistinction–asituationthateveryinterpreta-
tionhastotakeintoaccountthatwantstodohistoricaljusticetoitsobject.An
adequateunderstandingofthephilosophicaltraditionthereforepresupposesan
in-depthstudyofandintimatefamiliaritywiththat"forgottenkindofwriting”
whichStraussbroughttolightandrevivedinhiswritings.
ThefruitfulnessofStrauss’srediscoveryforhistoricalresearchcanhardlybe
overestimated.Thisholdsnolessregardingthephilosophicalconsequencesthat
followfromit.Ifthephilosophersofthepastdirectedtheirbooksatquitediffer-
entaddressees,betweenwhomtheythemselvescarefullydistinguished,ifthey
spoketothevastmajorityoftheircontemporaries–orneverlostsightofthem
astheiraudience–andiftheydirectedtheirdiscourseatthesametimetothe
smallnumberofthosecapableofphilosophyorwroteforfuturephilosophers,
thenitbecomesclearthattheytooktheopinionsoftheircontemporariesandthe
authoritativepositionsoffaithpropertothecommonwealthsinwhichtheylived
intoconsiderationwhenpresentingtheirteachingsinordertogivethefewwho
knowhowtounderstand,togivethosefewtounderstandinthesamebookswhat
separatedthephilosophersfrompreciselythoseopinionsandpositionsoffaithor
theextenttowhichtheysubjectedthoseopinionsandpositionsoffaithtoafun-
damentalcritique.
Fortheinterpreteroftheirbooksitfollowsthathemustrespondtotheartof
carefulwritingwiththeartofcarefulreadingandthatforhimthereisnoother
waytofindoutwhattheauthorsthoughtaboutthematterofconcerntothemthan
togetcompletelyinvolvedinthemovementofthoughtthatunderliestheexoter-
ic-esotericpresentation,and,withsuchguidance,tothinkthematterhimselfthat
isinquestion.Inotherwords,theinterpretermustinquirestartingfromagiven
work,whichcallsforhiscompleteattentionbothinitsrhetoricaldetailsandas
anarticulatedwhole,backtotheauthor’sintention;theinterpretermustsummon
upallhispowersinordertoliveuptothephilosophicalactivitythatfoundits
expressioninthatworkwithouthavingbeenabsorbedbyitorbeingidentical
withit.ThatisultimatelywhatStrauss’sfamoushermeneuticmaxim–thatitis
necessarytounderstandaphilosopherexactlyasheunderstoodhimself–aims
at,thatiswhereitleads.
Iwouldliketonamebywayofsummarythreephilosophicalconsequences
oftheaccessStraussopenedup.Thefirstconcernstheassertionofhistoricism
thatallthoughtisessentiallyconditionedbyhistory.Ifthereisadecisivediffer-
encebetweenthedouble-faced,exoteric-esotericallypresentedteachingandthe
thoughtofthephilosophers,itcannotbeconcludedfromthe"historicallycon-
ditioned”writingandspeakingofphilosophers–whichtakestheexpectations,
opinions,andprejudicesoftheircontemporariesintoconsiderationinorderto
fulfillitspoliticalpurpose–thatintheirthinkingtheauthorsweresubjecttothe