Noetic Heterogeneity and political things

Abstract

The interpretation of Strauss's work is not easy and continues to be the subject of intense debate. A first aspect of the controversy is whether his work properly contains a philosophical or political theory. Many scholars, including the author himself, emphasize his “skepticism”, a skepticism that would not be radical, but “zetetic”.A second point of controversy is whether his work is primarily historical in nature or whether there is, behind the historical studies, a philosophical or political vision of his own. Scholars have some difficulty in summarizing the content of Strauss's teaching, which is always wrapped in historical clothing. A third point of controversy is the nature of Strauss's perspective: the authors are divided between those who emphasize that it is an apology for philosophy and those who believe that it contains a certain vision of politics. What is the author's intention? We suggest an interpretation according to which the author wishes to recover the classical tradition and defends natural right in terms of a hierarchy of goods. Therefore, the pedagogical presentation that leads Strauss to prefer to let the reader think for himself should not be an insurmountable obstacle to understanding his ideas.