ONE OF THE IDEAS TO WHICH LEO STRAUSS drew the attention of many readers in the last century is that of a difference between exoteric and esoteric philosophical writing. These terms can refer to different kinds of philosophical teaching, one kind intended for a general and the other kind for a more restricted audience. Indeed, it seems to be the case historically that it was Aristotle who first used one of the terms in such a sense, as will be discussed (...) below. (shrink)

WITHIN the last half century, the relations between the Catholic Church and liberal politics have shifted significantly. To say the least, no one is surprised today to read of Catholic socialists, liberation theologies, or Christian Democratic parties of Catholic inspiration in Europe and Latin America. Many factors contributed to this change, but few would deny a central role to the work of the French philosopher, Jacques Maritain.

Gödel's theorem seems to me to prove that Mechanism is false, that is, that minds cannot be explained as machines. So also has it seemed to many other people: almost every mathematical logician I have put the matter to has confessed to similar thoughts, but has felt reluctant to commit himself definitely until he could see the whole argument set out, with all objections fully stated and properly met.1 This I attempt to do.

If there is any one man who is at the source of the current in contemporary philosophy which is the opposite of logical analysis, it is certainly Edmund Husserl. There is little doubt that his formative influence is far more important than, say, that of Kierkegaard, in the problematic of existentialism. And the frequency of the term “phenomenology” in writings on esthetics, ethics, social philosophy and a host of other disciplines is an indication of the more or less vague sense (...) of the original contribution which he made to modern thought. Yet there is an underlying paradox here: for it is logical analysis which appears to bear the banner of rationality and precision thinking, while many philosophers who derive more directly from Husserl seem to be grappling in a twilight region with the elusive meaning of human existence. But it was Husserl pre-eminently in our age who attempted to establish philosophy on a scientific basis through a rigorous analysis of logical categories and a theory of knowledge. Anyone who attempts to understand this tension in modern thought would do well to examine Husserl closely. (shrink)

This is a significant critical study of Husserl’s phenomenology and its transformations. The author studies the historical evolution of Husserl’s thought and its formal structure, and then attempts to measure its theoretical significance. He concludes that the Husserlian methodology is as such not ontological in the strict sense, and may therefore be considered an indispensable dimension of the critical process of the self-justification of a philosophy of being. The work ranges widely over the secondary literature and contains an excellent and (...) extensive bibliography, partially annotated. (shrink)