Philosophy@Utah State

Home » Actual philosophical discussion! » Plato the neocon?

Plato the neocon?

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 106 other followers

Old Main, USU


You need a Philosophy T-shirt! For more information, please click here.


* Interested in presenting a paper at an UNDERGRADUATE PHILOSOPHY CONFERENCE or publishing in an UNDERGRADUATE PHILOSOPHY JOURNAL? You should consider it! To see what options are available, both in state and out of state, click here.


• Is the world eternal? YES
• Do humans have contra-causal free will (i.e., can humans do otherwise)? NO
• Is beauty in the eye of the beholder? YES
• Do humans have souls? YES
• Are there natural rights? YES
• Is it morally permissible to eat meat? NO
• Is the unexamined life worth living? NO
• Is truth subjectivity? YES
• Is virtue necessary for happiness? YES
• Can a computer have a mind? YES
• Can humans know reality as it is in itself? YES
• Is hell other people? YES
• Can art be created accidentally? NO
• Can we change the past? NO
• Are numbers real? NO
• Is it always better to know the truth? YES

Blog Stats

  • 195,699 hits

Mike H. sent me this link to a brief response to a recent book on Plato by Simon Blackburn (author of “Think,” which hasn’t been as popular as “Blink” — go figure). The book is about how a number of neocons in the Bush administration were students of Leo Strauss, who understood Plato to claim (convincingly, I guess) that the state can decide to do whatever it wants and mislead the people in any way it wants in order to get its tasks done.

It’s certainly true that Plato thought some people were wiser than others, and the rulership should be entrusted to the wisest. And, if the political leaders truly are wise, as Plato understands wisdom, then the state doing “whatever it wants” would be a good thing (since what it wants is what wisdom would endorse). I would say, though, that at least several of these neocons either had an imporperly inflated sense of their own wisdom, or else (more likely) renounced the obligation to follow wisdom, and followed some sort of “will to power” instead; perhaps believing, as they learned from their teacher, that that’s exactly what Plato would advise.

Further thoughts?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: