[lbo-talk] Re: FW: Philosophical Gourmet on Strauss

[Jon Johanning]

> Philosophers ought to be concerned when their field is misrepresented in
> the media:  why should the public be led to believe that 
> non-philosophers
> like Strauss and Fukuyama, or failed philosophers like William Bennett,
> represent our field?  (As Burnyeat put it:  "There is much talk in
> Straussian writings about the nature of 'the philosopher' but no sign of
> any knowledge, from the inside, of what it is to be actively involved in
> philosophy.")

As an ex-asst.-prof-of-philosophy, I heartily agree. The Straussians, 
English-department pomos, etc., are not great shakes as philosophers. 
But the problem as I see it is that real philosophy is awfully hard for 
the general public, who have not had the necessary training, to 
understand, and that includes even more or less educated folks like 
writers in the New York Times. Let's face it -- who takes philosophy 
courses in college unless they're forced to, and how many even of the 
students who take them, except for the philosophy majors, really 
understand what the prof is trying to impart?

Jon Johanning // jjohanning at igc.org
__________________________________
"Ever notice that 'What the hell' is always the right decision?" - 
Marilyn Monroe