@svateboje
My take: Using Berger & Luckmann we can helpfully synthesize poli sci results on affect polarization + partisan media/internet/social-media. also, i tend to talk too much re folks like Voegelin & Ricoeur or, notes to self from another planet
and summing up the section, just all of these two pages. i marked out one passage for contemporary relevance.
early on, we leave off the puzzles around authorship. what we care about for now is the manifest *authority* of the oral tradition in a "civilizational" scope, incl things like the Anatolian expansion.
i guess it is time for me to drone for a while about Voegelin on Homer here is the Homer part of the TOC from OH2
this seems to me the same thing Pierce gets at with his three categories. and there other examples in other places too. here is one from Sokolowski (following Husserl) bc it happens to be handy
for fun, a taste of late Voegelin's approach to similar questions. strongly influenced by Balthasar, but quite distinct too. this pairing recalls for me that sometimes V would decline the label 'philosopher', opting for 'political scientist' instead. more empirical social science then H or B.
pairing lists on mid-term risks from Przeworski (left) & Bernstein (right) things to keep a watch on! (and, yes, this is also a plug for their substacks. major resources for me.)
sure, but not so important unless you think it some how is a counterfactual necessity in the 150k. like, compared to a relative vacuum in state party that allowed a little online media take off to be opposed by so very little. the state party is doing what it can, when it can. c'est la vie.
favorite bits on science, a sloppy series.... item 1) P Heelan Hermeneutical Phenomenology and the Philosophy of Science "Science too must have a social constitution and, of course, a social conscience." but not an unmoored, "strong" sociology of science that would perturb J Zammito!
Tuesday morning Voegelin on historical "ratchets" in self-interpretive experience from The New Science of Politics, ch 2
or the last annual lecture on the state of the discipline to the AHA from J Neem, which matches EK pretty well. (i owe the ref to Applebaum.) www.historians.org/perspectives...
[ “Patriotism,” I volunteered. I had rolled a live grenade into the center of the room. ]
great stuff. this esp. the idea that a liberal regime is anarchy & incapable of self defense is an absurd straw man. again, where was Schmitt's "virile" regime after 10 short years? a "liberalism with spine?" you better fucking believe it. these vicious clowns don't stand a chance in the end.
last shot. appropriately a reference to F Douglass’ justly celebrated iconoclasm.
and, finally, the end of my thread. four great pages in the symbolic constitution. a little social history, era of good feelings, canonization, etc. plus some more G Wood. maybe @jonathanmladd.com will be intrigued.
apocalyptic lite. low key revolutionary. bc , again, Aristotle and natural law thru Cicero.
next, two incredible pages on American apocalyptic. including a discussion of GS Wood’s “bafflement”! great great stuff. surely i’m not the only one? so funny to read this amid all the “balance“ talk re 1619 vs 1776, to put it handily.
but, if not a “progressive“ in an apocalyptic sense, still riffing on the puritan jeremiad… esp re CORRUPTION. a timely topic.
so many different directions to ponder! i tried to go off the cuff, but sticking to representative vs expository. each bk here stands for a multitude of themes hopefully somewhat separate from the other two. might need to add some alternative trios later. just a great exercise.
what, time for more "Plutarch" on 1787 delegates? sure thing. and all of G Read as a bonus