The Philosophical Rhetoric of Tragedy and Hope

• Published in: Perspectives on political science Vol. 44; no. 3; pp. 193 - 198
• Main Author: Havers, Grant N.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Philadelphia Routledge 03.07.2015; Taylor & Francis Inc
• Subjects: Christianity; Democracy; Enlightenment; hope; paganism; Philosophers; Philosophy; Political science; Reconciliation; tragedy; Writing
• ISSN: 1045-7097; 1930-5478
• DOI: 10.1080/10457097.2015.1038467

In his study of the lost history of secret philosophical writing, Arthur Melzer cogently and insightfully explains the radical difference between ancient esotericism, which is driven by the assumption that the permanence of the tragic conflict between philosophers and non-philosophers will always necessitate secret writing, and modern esotericism, which rests on the hope that one day a new world of harmonious relation between these two groups will render secret writing unnecessary. As I show, however, Melzer does not sufficiently pursue the philosophical (or religious) origins or implications of this ancient-modern quarrel. In describing the project of the modern Enlightenment as a "leap in the dark" that naively attempted to harmonize theory (philosophy) and praxis (societal custom or politics), Melzer occasionally admits that Christianity played some role in inspiring this hope. Because he does not develop this provocative insight, however, the full impact of his bracing study is undermined by this omission. To comprehend how Christianity (and the biblical tradition as a whole) inspired this leap into the dark (light?), we need to investigate the implications of the ancient-modern quarrel in the light of what Leo Strauss taught was the far more fundamental conflict between Jerusalem (biblical revelation) and Athens (pagan Greek philosophy). The moderns well understood that Jerusalem, which demands the reconciliation of all human beings to a degree that would be inconceivable to the tragically minded philosophers of Athens, is the true foundation of the one regime that requires a harmonious relationship between philosophers and society-modern liberal democracy.