Intriguing unpublished manuscripts by Leo Strauss which explore the intricate relationship between religion, philosophy, and politics, accompanied by fourteen interpretative essays.

Ranging from ancient Greek thought to contemporary quantum mechanics, Mastery of Nature investigates to what extent nature can be conquered to further human ends and to what extent such mastery is compatible with human flourishing.

Political philosophy and natural science -- Political and psychological preconditions to recovering Socratic science -- The rediscovery of Socratic dialectic: Strauss on Schmitt's concept of the political 2. the fundamental political predicament: Strauss on Plato's laws, book III -- The origin and nature of philosophy -- The natural frame of reference and the possibility of a comprehensive science -- Natural right and history (ch. III) on the origin and nature of philosophy -- Divine revelation and the possibility of science -- (...) Strauss's introduction to Platonic studies in modern times -- Philosophy and revelation -- The foundations and directions of modern philosophy and science -- Science and politics in Strauss's natural right course -- An irony beyond Machiavelli's irony: a reading of the concluding six paragraphs of thoughts on Machiavelli. (shrink)

The economist Armen Alchian said once that ever since the fiasco in the Garden of Eden, we have been living in a world in which what we want exceeds what is available. The desire for more satisfaction is a predictable behavioral implication of the fact of scarcity. In fact, it might have helped mankind to survive against competition from other forms of life. Man's desire for more utility gives rise to two interdependent issues that each and every society has to (...) face: how to increase the value of the community's wealth, and how to allocate the increment in wealth. We generalize those issues as the demand for economic development. (shrink)

The paper identifies the rule of law, the carriers of institutional restructuring, and the prevailing informal rules in the community as three critical determinants of the outcome of institutional restructuring in the community. The paper demonstrates that the analysis of the interaction among these three determinants – a claim I call the interaction thesis – explains why the transition from socialism to the market economy in postwar West Germany was a success, why the transition to capitalism in Eastern Europe is (...) still uncertain, and why the use of economic policies based on neoclassical economics have produced the rising strength of pro-socialist parties. The conclusion is that the interaction thesis is a powerful and perhaps necessary method for the analysis of institutional changes and their causes, directions and consequences.Cet article identifie l’état de droit, les supports des réformes institutionnelles, et les règles communautaires informelles qui y sont prévalent comme les trois facteurs explicatifs majeurs du succès ou de l’échec de la réforme institutionnelle dans un pays. Cet article démontre que l’analyse de l’interaction entre ces trois facteurs explicatifs – ce que j’appelle la thèse de l’interaction – explique, en premier lieu, le succès de la transition du socialisme vers l’économie de marché en Allemagne de l’Ouest de l’aprèsguerre, ensuite pourquoi la transition vers le capitalisme en Europe de l’Est demeure incertaine, et, enfin, pourquoi le recours à des politiques économiques fondées sur la science économique néoclassique a revigoré les partis politiques à orientation socialiste. La conclusion est que la thèse de l’interaction est une méthode féconde et peut-être nécessaire pour analyser les changements institutionnels ainsi que leurs causes, leurs directions et leurs conséquences. (shrink)

In the late 1980s, the actual accomplishments of capitalism finally made a convincing case against socialism. After several decades of experimentation with human beings, socialism in the former Soviet Union and Eastern European countries died an inglorious death. To an economist, the present value of the expected future benefits from socialism fell relative to their current production costs. And Marx was finally dead and, hopefully, buried.

The main objective of this essay is to show that the process of transition from socialism to capitalism in Central and Eastern Europe is a cultural problem rather than a technical one. In pursuing that objective I analyze two interrelated issues. First, analysis shows why and how cultural differences in Central and Eastern Europe have, via transaction costs specific to the process of transition, specific and predictable effects on the results of institutional restructuring, and, consequently, on economic performance. Second, I (...) argue that spontaneous changes in the prevailing culture could, under a set of credible and stable formal rules of the game, help to close a gap between the culture supportive of capitalism and the prevailing culture in Central and Eastern Europe. a Footnotesa My colleague and friend Fred Fransen made two major contributions to this essay: he helped me identify numerous inconsistencies in the essay, and he changed a number of my perceptions on the relationship between culture and economic performance. James Buchanan, Ljubo Madzar, Henry Manne, Milic Milovanovic, and Katarina Ott gave me useful suggestions and comments on earlier drafts. I am grateful to Victor Vanberg and Ulrich Witt for the opportunity to discuss this essay with their colleagues and students at the University of Freiburg and Max Planck Institute in Jena, Germany. (shrink)

Francis Bacon's "Inquiry Touching Human Nature" is an engagement at a fundamental level with the political and philosophic thought of one of the founders of modernity, Francis Bacon. Bacon had a comprehensive vision of the human situation. And because he saw the costs or dangers of modern life as clearly as he predicted its achievements and boons, Bacon is a thinker who addresses directly and deeply our own perplexities.

Natural Right and History is widely recognized as Strauss’s most influential work. The six lectures, written while Strauss was at the New School, and a full transcript of the 1949 Walgreen Lectures show Strauss working toward the ideas he would present in fully matured form in his landmark work. In them, he explores natural right and the relationship between modern philosophers and the thought of the ancient Greek philosophers, as well as the relation of political philosophy to contemporary political science (...) and to major political and historical events, especially the Holocaust and World War II. Previously unpublished in book form, Strauss’s lectures are presented here in a thematic order that mirrors Natural Right and History and with interpretive essays by J. A. Colen, Christopher Lynch, Svetozar Minkov, Daniel Tanguay, Nathan Tarcov, and Michael Zuckert that establish their relation to the work. Rounding out the book are copious annotations and notes to facilitate further study. (shrink)

Leo Strauss famously asserted that the fundamental, defining debate within Western civilization is that between Jerusalem and Athens, piety and philosophy, the Bible and Plato. And yet, surprisingly, Strauss never published any of his thoughts on Plato’s dialogue on piety, the Euthyphro. This volume presents, for the first time, Strauss’s 1948 notebook on the dialogue, written in preparation for a class at the New School for Social Research. Featuring close analysis and line-by-line commentary, the notebook opens a window onto a (...) philosophic mind in action, as Strauss asks questions of the classic text, jots down observations and formulations, and analyzes very specific terms and arguments but also steps back, reviews the overall movement of the dialogue, and reconsiders previous conclusions. Beyond the notebook, the volume also brings together all the known materials that lay out Strauss’s thoughts on the Euthyphro. This includes newly transcribed and edited public lectures, illuminating appendixes, critical essays by volume editors Hannes Kerber and Svetozar Y. Minkov and scholar Wayne Ambler, an account of Strauss’s public lecture, and a new English translation of Plato’s Euthyphro by Seth Benardete, a classicist and one of Strauss’s students. Engaging and inspiring, Leo Strauss on Plato’s “Euthyphro” is a vital resource for scholars and students of political theory, readers interested in the intersection of philosophy and religion, and a must-have for anyone who studies Strauss. (shrink)

Leo Strauss’s _The Political Philosophy of Hobbes_ deservedly ranks among his most widely acclaimed works. In it Strauss argues that the basis for Hobbes’s natural and political science is his interest in “self-knowledge of man as he really is.” The writings collected in this book, each written prior to that classic volume, complement that account. Thus at long last, this book allows us to have a complete picture of Strauss’s interpretation of Hobbes, the thinker pivotal to the fundamental theme of (...) his life’s work: the conflicting demands of philosophy and revelation, or as he termed it, “the theologico-political problem.” It is no exaggeration to say that Strauss’s work on Hobbes’s critique of religion is essential to his analysis of Hobbes’s political philosophy, and vice versa. This volume will spark new interest in Hobbes’s explication of the Bible and in his understanding of religion by revealing previously neglected dimensions and motives of Hobbes’s “theology.” At the same time, scholars interested in the intellectual development of Leo Strauss will find in these writings the missing link, as it were, between his two early books,_ __Spinoza’s Critique of Religion_ and _The Political Philosophy of Hobbes_. In addition, this volume makes available for the first time in English a letter, a book outline, an extended review, an engagement with legal positivism, and an account of Strauss’s work on Hobbes by Heinrich Meier, all of which shed light on Strauss’s concerns and his approach to Hobbes in particular, as well as to modern political thought and life. (shrink)

In this paper the author seeks to shed light on the political and philosophical context of the second half of 20th century in which he intellectually came of age. In his intellectual and political development the author distinguishes three main phases. He characterizes the first phase of his development as Praxis, revisionist, dissident Marxism and reformist communism. The second phase was post-Marxism and post-communism, while in the last decade of the 20th century the author defines his theoretical views as non-Marxist. (...) The author defines his latest philosophical-political standpoint as social democratic which, after his own self-understanding, comes closest to West European social democracy.. Autor u ovom radu pokusava da osvetli politicki i filozofski kontekst druge polovine XX veka u kome je intelektualno delovao i sazrevao. U svom intelektualnom i politickom razvitku on razmatra tri glavne faze. Prvu fazu svog razvitka autor karakterise kao praksisticki, revizionisticki, disidentski marksizam i reformisticki komunizam. Drugu fazu predstavlja postmarksizam i postkomunizam, a u poslednjoj deceniji XX veka autor svoje teorijsko stanoviste odredjuje kao nemarksisticko. Svoje najnovije filozofsko-politicko stanoviste autor smatra socijal-eko-demokratskim koje je po njegovom vlastitom samorazumevanju najblize zapadnoevropskoj socijaldemokratiji. (shrink)

U prvom, nacelnom delu, autor polazi od toga da jedna mala zemlja, kao sto je nasa, ne moze realisticki ocekivati jednakost, pa cak ni punu ravnopravnost u odnosima sa SAD kao planetarno dominantnom silom. Zato se, prema njemu prema SAD moramo odnositi pragmaticno. To za njega ne znaci da nema nikakvih sansi da sa uspehom otvoreno i odlucno postavimo pitanje i nasih nacionalno-drzavnih interesa i prava kad nastojimo da ih sto vise uskladimo sa interesima i pravima te najmerodavnije i najsilodavnije (...) zemlje. Ekstremni pragmaticari kod nas potcenjuju opasnost principijelisticke reakcije dobrog dela naroda ako snishodljivo preteruju sa popustanjem i prilagodjavanjem. Za nas je najrelevantniji slucaj i najbolji primer za ugled Grcka. U nasim odnosima sa SAD, prema autoru, cesto dolazi do nesporazuma izmedju ostalog i zbog sustinskih razlika u shvatanjima nacije i religije kao i njihovog odnosa sa drzavom. Tim razlikama i nesporazumima posvecena su dva preostala dela ovog teksta. (shrink)

This article argues the main following points. (1) Communism was fatefully dependent upon the action or inaction of its top leaders because of the vulnerability of the hyper-centralized power and hyper-centralized defense of the ruling class and the ruling party. No one was really able to seriously predict the historical contingencies such as Gorbachev and Yeltsin that played a decisive role. The most that social scientists and analysts could safely claim was that communism had become unsuccessful and problematical to such (...) an extent that force alone could maintain it. However, given the overall history of communism, who could have anticipated that such force would not be used. (2) The United States is toiling now in an overwhelmingly difficult and dangerous transition, not only from a ‘superpower’ to ‘merely’ a big power, but from a totalistic and laissez-faire capitalism to a limited and state-regulated capitalism. It is the most efficacious way of production and primary distribution. However, unless capitalism, national and global, becomes regulated and combined with some kind of socialism (solidarism) that is yet to be established, global crises will keep recurring. The best chance for enlightened socialist (solidaristic) humanism lies in secondary distribution based on equality and justice as its fundamental principles. (3) The very term ‘superpower’ suggests a kind of superhuman, almost divine power. The United States does not have such power because (among other things) apocalyptic weapons are at the disposal of some considerably weaker states (in every other respect). (4) The possibility of the self-destruction of humankind has become the over-determination of all other over-determinations in history. It follows that auto-apocalypse must be separated from the categorical and epochal dichotomy between modernity/ modernism and postmodernity/postmodernism and given an absolute priority, both theoretical and practical. This break should be characterized as post-postmodernity and reflection upon it as post-postmodernism. We are in vital need of a total anti-apocalyptic turnaround in overall thought, sensitivity, activity and organization. Unfortunately, it can now safely be predicted that more and more states and societies, even those founded on (internal) freedoms and desirous to maintain them, will become transformed into states and societies focused on the struggle for survival in the face of auto-apocalyptic threats. I believe that confronted more and more with such threats liberalism will actually, and later probably also explicitly, yield the place of the fundamental operative (unlike declarative) view of the world, ideology, imagology, and principle of social organization — to humankind existentialism. We have entered an existentialist ‘end of history’ instead of the proclaimed liberalistic ‘end of history’. (shrink)

As the military dictatorship was being imposed on Poland, Enrico Berlinguer declared: “The model set in motion by the October revolution has run out of steam.” I would add: “The Yugoslav model of that archetype (otherwise progressive and meaningful), symbolized by Stalin's break with Tito in 1948 even though it actually began with Tito's break with Stalin a year or two later, ran out of steam in terms of its ability to generate innovation among the people and to motivate and (...) mobilize them as early as the end of the 1960s.” Ever since then, the Yugoslav system has been caught in a vicious circle. (shrink)

As many readers of Locke Studies are aware, the long-awaited publication of a scholarly edition of Locke’s published Abrégé and the transcription of an English “Epitome” of An Essay concerning Human Understanding (Essay) should be published in the near future. Both of these documents are tantalizing for aiding in the interpretation of the Essay because they are the author’s own efforts to clarify the argument and design of his great work prior to publication. This short note briefly summarizes the evidence (...) for the superiority of the “Epitome” over the Abrégé and suggests several ways in which a clearer understanding of these documents could contribute to a more accurate reading of the Essay. (shrink)