Journals / Kültür ve İletişim / 2026 / Cilt: 27 Sayı: 53

Philosophy Must Be Protected: On The Foundations of Leo Strauss’s Anti-Egalitarian Conservatism

Felsefeyi Korumak Gerekir: Leo Strauss’un Eşitlikçilik-Karşıtı Muhafazakârlığının Temellerine Dair

Ömür Birler(ORTA DOĞU TEKNİK ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-6128-8691
Pages
82–109
Publication Date
2024-03-25
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The study will present its thesis by focusing on a comparison between his works on the ancient philosopher Xenophon and the modern political scientist Hobbes.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study analyses foundations of Leo Strauss’s ideas who is considered among the significant figures of contemporary conservatism by attempting to uncover the anti-egalitarian foundation of his conservative thought.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Known for his numerous works in the field of history of political thought, Strauss’s main concern has been the crisis of the West, which he associates with the loss of ancient political philosophy.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The study will present its thesis by focusing on a comparison between his works on the ancient philosopher Xenophon and the modern political scientist Hobbes.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Leo Strauss · muhafazakârlık · siyasal felsefe

Abstract

This study analyses foundations of Leo Strauss’s ideas who is considered among the significant figures of contemporary conservatism by attempting to uncover the anti-egalitarian foundation of his conservative thought. Known for his numerous works in the field of history of political thought, Strauss’s main concern has been the crisis of the West, which he associates with the loss of ancient political philosophy. According to him, the reasons for the loss of direction in the West lie in the modern thinkers’ abandonment of the ancient philosophy and its most crucial question: ‘What is good life?’ The origins of Strauss’s conservative politics, for which the resolution lies in the return to classical philosophy, reveal themselves at this point. A Straussian political philosophy exposes itself with two main problems of conservatism to the extent that it emphasizes the inevitable tension between the philosopher and the city: the select few vs. the unqualified masses and the universal knowledge of philosophy vs. the relativity of the political opinions. The study will present its thesis by focusing on a comparison between his works on the ancient philosopher Xenophon and the modern political scientist Hobbes.

Özet

Bu çalışma çağdaş muhafazakârlığın önemli temsilcileri arasında yer alan Leo Strauss’un düşüncesinin temellerini inceleyerek Straussçu muhafazakâr siyasetin eşitlikçilik-karşıtı zeminini açığa çıkartmaya çalışmaktadır. Siyasal düşünceler tarihi alanında sayısız eserler vermiş olan Strauss’un esas odağı Batı’nın krizi olarak adlandırdığı ve antik siyaset felsefesinin terkedilmesiyle ilişkilendirdiği olgu olmuştur. Strauss’a göre bugün Batı’nın yönünü kaybetmiş olmasının ardında modern düşünürlerin antik felsefeye sırtlarını dönmesi ve antik siyasal düşüncenin en önemli sorusu olan ‘iyi yaşam nedir?’ sorusunun artık rafa kaldırılmış olması yatmaktadır. Çözümü klasik siyasal felsefeye geri dönüşte gören Strauss’un muhafazakâr siyasetinin kaynağı da burada kendini göstermektedir. Straussçu bir siyasal felsefe kaçınılmaz olduğunu öne sürdüğü filozof ve kent arasındaki gerilime vurgu yaptığı ölçüde muhafazakârlığın iki temel problemiyle karşımıza çıkmaktadır: Seçkin azınlık karşısında niteliksiz kalabalıklar ve felsefi bilginin evrenselliği karşısında siyasal kanıların göreceliği. Çalışma tezini düşünürün antik filozof Ksenofon ve modern siyaset bilimci Hobbes üzerine çalışmalarını karşılaştırarak sunacaktır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Birler, Ö. (2024). Philosophy Must Be Protected: On The Foundations of Leo Strauss’s Anti-Egalitarian Conservatism. Kültür ve İletişim, Cilt: 27 Sayı: 53, 82–109. https://doi.org/10.18691/kulturveiletisim.1398747

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (25)

  1. Baştürk, Efe (2021). “Leo Strauss, Tiranlık ve Hiero’nun Platoncu Okuması.” FLSF Felsefe ve Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 32: 1-20.
  2. Bloom, Allan (1974). “Leo Strauss: September 20, 1899- October 18, 1973.” Political Theory, 2(4): 372-392.
  3. Drury Shadia. (1988). The Political Ideas of Leo Strauss. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
  4. Gunnell, John (1978). “The Myth of the Tradition.” The American Political Science Review, 72(1): 122- 134.
  5. Hobbes, Thomas (1651). Leviathan. Çev., Semih Lim. Yapı Kredi Yayınları: İstanbul.
  6. Holmes Stephen. (1993). The Anatomy of Antiliberalism. Cambridge: Harvard University.
  7. Pippin Robert (1992). “The Modern World of Leo Strauss.” Political Theory, 20(3): 448-472.
  8. Rosen, Stanley (1987). Hermeneutics as Politics. New York: Oxford University Press.
  9. Smith Gregory. (1997). “Leo Strauss and the Straussians: An Anti-democratic Cult? PS. Political Science & Politics, 30(2): 180-189.
  10. Strauss, Leo (1930). Spinoza’s Critique of Religion. New York: Schocken Books.
  11. Strauss, Leo (1936). The Political Philosophy of Hobbes: Its Basis and Genesis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  12. Strauss, Leo (1945). “On Classical Political Philosophy,” An Introduction to Political Philosophy: Ten Essays by Leo Strauss. Hilail Gildin (der.) içinde. Detroit: Wayne State University Press. 1989. 59-79.
  13. Strauss, Leo (1946). “On a New Interpretation of Plato’s Political Philosophy.” Social Research, 13(3): 326-367.
  14. Strauss, Leo (1952). Persecution and the Art of Writing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  15. Strauss, Leo (1953). Doğal Hak ve Tarih. Çev. Murat Erşen ve Petek Onur. İstanbul: Say.
  16. Strauss, Leo (1961). “Relativism.” Relativism and the Study of Man. Helmut Shoeck ve James W. Wiggins (der.) içinde. Princeton: D. Von Nostrand. 135-157.
  17. Strauss, Leo (1959). “What is Political Philosophy?” An Introduction to Political Philosophy: Ten Essays by Leo Strauss. Hilail Gildin (der.) içinde. Detroit: Wayne State University Press. 1989. 3-57.
  18. Strauss, Leo (1964). City and Man. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
  19. Strauss, Leo (1972). “Political Philosophy and the Crisis of Our Time.” The Post-Behavioral Era. George J. Graham ve GeorgeW. Carey (der.) içinde. New York: David McKay. 212-248.
  20. Strauss, Leo (1975). “The Three Waves of Modernity,” An Introduction to Political Philosophy: Ten Essays by Leo Strauss. Hilail Gildin (der.) içinde. Detroit: Wayne State University Press. 1989. 81-99.
  21. Strauss, Leo (1978). “Correspondence Concerning Wahrheit und Methode.” Independent Journal of Philosophy, 2: 5-12.
  22. Strauss, Leo (2000). On Tyranny: Including the Strauss-Kojéve Correspondence. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  23. Ulaş Aksoy, Mete (2018). “Leo Strauss’un Hiero Yorumunda Tiranlık Öğretisi ve Felsefe.” FLSF Felsefe ve Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 25: 347-365.
  24. Voegelin, Eric (1949). “Review Essay On Tyranny.” Review of Politics, 11(2): 241-244.
  25. Zuckert, Catherine (1996). Postmodern Platos: Nietzsche, Heidegger, Gadamer, Strauss, Derrida. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.