one reason why i give this seminar now
is
as a kind of companion course to my
natural life course
certain aspects of the natural light
problem will not be discussed
in my lecture course
and which will come up here in the
discussion of system now i'll start from
the most external
what shall we read now
i have a statement at the bookstore also
but i can still repeat it
we want to read four writings of caesar
the republic the lords
the of the good on the ends of good and
bad things in latin dependables
and the offices or duties
these are many books and one could
rightly say
that's too much for one course but in
what
could in with all due respect for caesar
one could say
synthetic is easier to understand and
play to our aristotle
and therefore it is not an extraordinary
risk which we are taking
on the other hand it will appear later
it is a pity that one cannot read more
of this level
let me his two writings on the nature of
the gods
and on divination are in a way
judgment of his political doctrine too
but that would simply be too much for
one court
now i begin first with a very simple
question which i've addressed to you
so that we see whether we have any
common ground
why is cicero famous
as far as political theory
let us first try to answer this question
as a
introduction to the course and you all
have read
the histories of political theory or you
have taken courses in it
or they have acquired such knowledge
in other legitimate ways and
so what what is famous for as far as
what in the theory is concept
scissors statement is of no concern to
us in this course
now what do you know don't don't
be ashamed to say what you have learned
in elementary context perhaps
but what is he famous for
that you have an answer a suggestion of
your hand
yes that is a very good answer as far as
it goes
no i mean this let me put it this way
cicero is the oldest
writer of whom we have
complete works who has set forth the
doctrine of natural law
yeah because his doctrine is older than
this
even this needs a footnote because the
writings in which cesaro does set forth
this doctrine
the republican laws are not complete
there are have been a bit destroyed in
the course of the
malignancy of times has done some damage
now that is one let us use is the loser
term
in cicero is the oldest classic
of the higher law yes
that is one and then there is an other
consideration
which some of you may know and other
crucial political doctrine
of which caesareal was a classic well
that is a doctrine of the mixed regime
the view that the best political order
is a
mixture of monarchy aristocracy and
democracy
is presented in the service republic
is that this is an issue which
one has to consider would perhaps appear
from the following conservation
what cicero says about the mixed regime
is not original
just as what he says about the natural
law is not original
it goes back in this form
to a man called police
a greek historian
about a century prior to system
he said in the sixth book of polyps
history you'll find the presentation of
the
mixed regime doctrine is the classical
doctrine
now there is a strict line
from politics to
mortus cue spirit of laws where the
mixed doctrine mixed regime doctrine is
taken up in a conservative modified
manner
and there is a very strict and also very
short line
from monster to the veterans papers so
we are immediately
very welcome at one point must not be
forgotten incidentally
the cicero's doctrine of the mixed
regime is developed in this republic
could not have had any any influence
throughout the ages
because cicero's republic was lost
it reappeared only in 1820 or so
the exact date you finally edition where
it was discovered by a cardinal
in the vatican library angelo may
and since that time and you know in this
fragmentary we
say i don't believe it behaves half of
the book
probably less yeah less than half of the
book
good and then there is a third point a
which of a general nature
cicero says the best regime is the
mixture but there where do we find the
best regime
simply that mixed regime wrong
the same was said by polybius now this
leads to the following
important theoretical question because
after all we are not
ancient historians or concerned with the
roman constitution
and that is this
when you study the platonic or
aristotelian
political doctrine you get a description
of the mix of the best regime of the
best regime
without any proper names if i may say
the best regime is described it is seen
well this regime has something in common
that is closer to it that is more about
it but the best regime is not
necessarily
in existence anywhere on earth
it may be but it is honest
in bolivia's ancestral the best regime
is
found in an actual region
in the wrong and this race is a very
important theoretical question the
question of the relation between
ideal and reality
how is it possible that the idea
should become these are i believe the
three most elementary considerations
which would occur the one
regarding cecile on the base of the
common opinions
so one more introductory point
cicero is well known as the
oldest classic of the national law
teacher
say of the higher law teaching we use a
more
innocuous term is this
natural law doctrine as presented by
cicero is
according to general opinion which as
far as i know is correct
trace to a philosophic school
called to a school called the
story our family will hear
quite a bit in this course the stories
now the stoics is so school was founded
after aristotle i believe even after the
death of other soldiers
that's not so important it was a school
which presupposed the platonic
aristotelian teaching
but regarded it as insufficient for a
variety of reasons
and modified it but the basic premise at
least as far as
moral political questions are concerned
is are the same
socratic premise now seasonal presents
historic doctrine we can say
and yet he is not a stoic but
even an opponent of these stoics
you see what happened in greek
philosophy
after aristotle was this he said
graduate founded the school this year
no the academy alistair led founded the
school the museum
or the harry potters and
then in these schools
transmitted the teachings of the
respective masters with modifications
with modifications
but still fundamentally the members of
the platonic school they are platonists
and the members of arizona school
various interiors
now but then two new schools were
founded
because of the dissatisfaction with
benjamin harrison
what is this loyal school which is
characteristically not
called after an individual but it's
called
after the place where they met a store
kind of how what is the visualization
for store
support and the other school is called
epicurean school after the founder every
career
these two schools had a very great
popular success that popular
among the highly educated classes of
the hellenized mediterranean world
naturally
and somehow they are characteristic of
this post-partisan period
both and feministic and the roman
empire but then another thing took place
a kind of revolution
and this revolution took place in
the platonic economy some generations
after plato
say about in the middle of the second
century is a platonic academy
unprevented radical change a change in
the direction of
skepticism the platonic
academy became skeptical
you know what skeptical means in the
superficial intense
scholar scholastic meaning of the term
a skeptic is a man who is nice to
possess
the truth he can have probable opinions
but he cannot he doesn't possess
knowledge
but now there is of course that this
happened in the platonic school it's not
a complete accident because
we must never forget that sugar is
appears also as a man
who does not possess knowledge but is
only seeking you know that is what's not
in the action
is this there are other forms of
skepticism that's of no interest
to us now now this academic skeptics
academic does not mean here as we say
academic social science but academic
media is a skeptic of the skepticism of
the platonic academy
was that school which is right here
and this school reject its most
characteristic feature one could say
is its rejection of stoic
dogmas the part i mean a part of that
stoic dogmatism is historic natural
logic
historic natural law teaching is based
on the historic
teaching regarding the nature of the
gods
and the providence exercised by the gods
the skeptics rejected this teaching
and therefore they are rejected by
implication
the natural law teaching based upon
historic theology
now cicero is an academic study and he
wrote
two books in which he presented this
tactical criticism
of stoic theology that is in the nature
of the gods
and on divination a two lines which we
cannot read here because
water is much too short but
the extraordinary thing is that this
academic
skeptic adults
is the character of sicily's
philosophical side
that cicero's word is of course
infinitely large
compared with that plato for example and
because you have the orations you know
you have the rhetorical writings and you
have the philosopher
and an enormous epistle of earth in
addition
and we can must limit ourselves
absolutely to the philosophic critics
and only to
some of them now cicero's
philosophical works are dialogues
this is not completely surprising
because
we have red dialogues prior to cicero
for example the platonic diamonds
but the thesalonian dialogues differ
from the platonic dialogues in one very
simple respect
as you know plato never speaks of
himself
in any dialogue and he does mention
plato but then someone else says plato
was ill
say
this kind of thing do you know who did
this who brought in
his own ego
yes xenophon uses this technique that he
says i
heard sugarless discusses in this matter
yeah
which of course is in very very good
because we have an
eyewitness or an ear witness and so we
know we have the real stuff
whereas in plato platter never gives us
any guarantee
whether the dialogues he presents are
not pure
inventions of plato and i'm afraid they
are pure inventions but xenophon at
least claims
this
dialogues and which are lost
but the arsene dialogues have seemed to
be the models
of caesarean styles that is what i
at least i believe to remember cesaro
made
a remark about his dialogues in one of
his
writing in mormon but one is
particularly interesting
that occurs in a verb called the
tusculum disputations
the disputations in tusculum tusculum
was a
landed a state of sicily and here there
occurs a famous sentence
so gates was the first
who called philosophy down from heaven
and placed it in cities
and even introduced it into the houses
and compelled it to investigate
regarding life
manners and good and bad things
sugar has this manifold way of disputing
and the variety of subject matter and
the magnitude of mind
was consecrated
by no i'm sorry plato's magnitude
consecrated this way of disputing
two writings and thus produce
a variety of dissenting philosophies
they say understanding philosophy for
these schools
out of those schools available
philosophic schools
we cicero have followed
that school particularly or that manner
particularly
which we believe socrates has used
nameless one
in order to conceal our
own opinion in order to liberate
others from error and
in order to seek in every disputation
what is most similar to the truth
that means what is most probable
to repeat this is this um silveronian
diamond
serves these three purposes to conceal
his own opinion
not to upload him as an authoritarian
to liberate us from error
and in every disputation you seek what
is most problem
there are other questions to the same
effect but that is most
the clearest one so this much in a way
of introduction
now i thought that
we should turn to the subject
immediately
so that we can cover these many writings
which we have to
discuss and i prepare the discussion
of the first book of the republic
because the order in which i think we
should read
his republic laws that you say the
political writings
proper curse and then turn to the
discussion of principles
in the book on the ends of good and bad
things
and finally the offices where cesaro
discusses
the complexities the moral complexities
which arise
by virtue of the apparent conflict
between the moral
and the experience where such nice
questions are discussed
whether you are entitled to
advertise at bad merchandise
as very good and
and you know the trade model complete
perplexity that
the one hand to have dishonest on the
other hand
if you do not do it other more dishonest
man
we buy it from you cheaply and advertise
it much more than you would
and other nice questions which deserves
the attention
of every single man so now i turned the
first book off to the public
do you have the copy those who have
should should take it out
i asked the bookstore to get
copies but uh
i hope you can i mean yeah if there is
someone who
let me see whether the republicans let
me know
no i'm sorry i need that copy otherwise
as you would see if you would look at it
at the first page
say on in your edition page 13
is that the beginning is missing
the beginning is missing but we have
sufficient
um left of cinderella's
prologue to understand
what the general subject matter of the
prologue
now let me see where does the dialogue
begin
the dialogue begins
from page 29 on your edition
so there are about 16 pages of
the product of the product has been
conserved
now what the the discussion in the
prologue cesaro
discusses a problem
with which you may be familiar from
platon harrisburg
the question of the two ways of life
the active life the practical of
political life
ends a contemplative life
it's a theoretical life and caesareal
defends the active life the political
life
against the philosophers or
against certain philosophers that is not
quite clear
do you know what's the issue otherwise
you wouldn't understand what is
what do you know what the issue is
i'm sure i see someone among you know
but
they should should speak up what is the
issue
is this a scene well the uh the issue is
which is the more normal life of caring
for the public
concerns of course the active life
on its highest level because only there
does the problem become clear
because in a way we all have to be
active the most contemplative of us
active life means that i've dedicated to
action
and that is in the highest form the life
of the statesman
the political life in the fullest sense
and
the now informal societies
it was perfectly intelligible if someone
would say
the highest activity which a man can
pursue is to be
the statesman in his society
i believe even today it is intelligent
i mean if you see for example a simple
which is a recognition of the dignity of
the president of the united states
whoever that president may be is still a
reflection of it i mean we still
understand it
and every respect for gary cooper
and other equate men of course it
does not completely conceive from us
the fact that a man who really acts
statesman yeah that is not an actor
it's not the real thing the real thing
is the statesman himself
and especially if he is a great
statesman and then there is no problem
either who is as famous in the western
world today
as with the church you know even his
paintings become famous
through his traitors so we understand
that
but in ancient times there were people
who said
why is it actually flying the highest
level with something
in the highest degree noble and
admirable
there is a life which is still more
higher still higher and let's say called
the life of contemplation
or the theoretical life or the like
philosophic life
again i believe even those who know
nothing of the tradition
can still understand this on the basis
of present day observation
for example today there are quite a few
people i believe who would still say
that however great a statesman may be
that say a true poet
is in a way more
important to us for as
living human beings than a statesman can
be
at least you have heard that opinion now
only in classical times they did not
believe that the poet is called
could possibly be that in their sense
it's a philosophy
so that is a very tried summary of this
issue with which this reveals
and cicelo takes the applied on alison
had come out clearly for the supremacy
of the theoretical
cicero takes the side of the active life
we cannot blame him for that he was a
great roman statesman who had saved the
republic against cataline and in other
situations and there are more
serious reasons for that now why what
how does he argue at the end of the
first paragraph which is on
page 15 at the
end of the first paragraph we do this
whoever has it rated we do not insist on
formalities
whoever has the traces the last sentence
of the first paragraph on page 15.
i will protect myself
in the human race so great that need of
lucrative great desire to defend the
common safety
of the strength
is the natural character of the
need for virtue
and of the loss for the defense of the
common
safety because they are natural
they overcome often all
planishments of pleasure and
condition if nature
did not drive a man and in particular
certain matter in the direction of
virtues
and the common good this would not be
possible
now the connection between this
two points a need for virtue and the
love for the defense of the common
safety
is this as citadel makes clear in the
secret
the highest use of virtue
is the government of the commonwealth
the highest use of virtue is the
government of the commonwealth
now in the first place is this statement
intelligent
the highest use of virtue is a
government of course
the good government of the community is
his intelligence
i mean after all ordinary people
also can be virtuous we take i assume
and but why is that used higher
do we understand that i mean i learned
to avoid the impression
that this is an old moralist who talked
about
things which have proved to be holy
meaningless
by this and recent advances of
psychology
and that we let us see whether we do not
understand
when we look at such matters
from the non-academic point of view from
the practical point of view whether we
do not recognize what is the rule means
why should this be the highest version
it's a virtue of the
most perfect statesman
compared with the very great virtue of a
perfectly virtuous
housewife or or schoolmaster or whatever
you have why should it be
yes
the political the state of
well also one could perhaps say what you
imply is this
somehow we said we think that virtue has
something to do with beneficence
yeah with beneficence
now the greatest the broadest
possibility
of being a benefactor of one's
fellow man is that of the statesman
think of any philanthropic benefactor
who established a hospital or or many
hospitals also and compare with what his
statesmen could do
to help his fellow men so that may would
make some some sense
now cesaro goes on to argue as follows
so statesmen but of course one thing is
to say
that government of the city of a
commonwealth requires
a higher degree of virtue than merely
private life
and another thing is to say it is the
highest virtue
meaning a higher virtue than that
possessed
by philosophers because that is the
issue
if you do not like the word philosophers
for strong
reasons of which we hope the business
pose while we go on
then say no intellectuals won't do
but say poets or creative artists
because it's the same issue
fundamentally in the same mission
to our popular understanding today to
creative office has taken the
president's philosophy
for reasons which would take us too long
to explain
but and i can assume this that even to
completely
uninitiated in this kind of thing
knows of the fact that
the true the two
things competing for
men's highest admiration
and on the other hand the creative
artists now you see so i make even
allowance for those who prefer
uh clark gable to any political man
because this man means of course by
clark gable
the creative artists you see but more
sophisticated people would go higher up
and say perhaps
elliot or hemingway i
do not know but i know only the names
but certainly certain individuals
generally regardless creative artists
they are those who compete for
us the highest respect even today or is
my thief is wrong is it all
could one say perhaps that some boxer
might have a higher prestige than either
a distinguished salesman or general on
the one hand or a distinguished creative
artist
could one make his objection to him
yeah of this i could more easily dispose
because
one could say not entirely without
tracing
as a businessman belongs to the side of
the statesman
or the general yeah you know also
that i could give some empirical proof
charles wilson if you know what i mean
but still there's still
nothing left and what about boxers could
not say football makes this as a valid
objection
is that some people would really say
yeah
that is true but still what would uh but
could or not also say something else
i mean let's let's you see i'll tell you
why i don't like this answer
because it would blur the distinction
when you speak of the boxer as a
creative artist
then you come also with the same reason
to the father
and then he come to the general and he
adds another thing
so for this reason i prefer another
because to a man for example
contemplating the way of life that he
should follow
they would appear as two more of us
distinct
ways of life great many people
would be far more attracted to the
business world
yeah but what about what about
the boxer you know to meet this issue
why can one safely disregard the boxer
in this connection or or the russia
or any other men of his kind why can we
do that
why is even today
it's clear that there are these two
peaks
in the ordinary social orientation the
practical man
of the highest order on the one hand and
the theoretical man
on his father i think a boxer was never
famous
unless they have support who writes lord
that would be true of statesmen
their memory after their death depends
on the poets or something like poets
no yes
success is of course not insufficient
actually
because that one can prove easily if
someone commits and kills
a great number of men but you know
an escaped convict he also will be
both using their mental capacities is
the highest degree
maybe
the collection of them
is still alive okay that's true
that's perfect that would be the whole
tree
that is
that should you have everybody else you
could have taken theoretical men as well
that's true
but i try to make the utmost
concession to those that our
points of view are completely different
from those of olden
times since einstein employed
are certainly theoretical men yeah
they're no difficulty arises but when
you
replace the strictly theoretical the
philosopher of scientists
by a creative artist you can say there's
an entirely new point of view
and for this reason i said
so we see then the issue is still
intelligent
now what how does cecile argue then in
the first place it says
statesmen complete by
deed what the philosophers
speak of in their corners
they talk and debate and discuss
but of course it doesn't reach an issue
even if they find out something is good
that does not make it a public fact
it becomes a popular fact only by
legislation of course
now this could so in other words is
since
admittedly the argument is this that is
higher
which completes this thing rather which
only initiates and it is
led to its consummation by the statesman
therefore the statesman is higher now
this argument could however mean
that states statesmanship place supposes
philosophy
since the philosophers laid the
foundation they found out the
fundamental
truth regarding good and bad and
statement completed
cicero stays here no
and that is i think let's read this
second paragraph on the second paragraph
on page 15.
but it is not enough to possess virtue
as if it were an art of some sort
unless you make use of it though it is
true that an art
even if you never use it can still
remain in your possession by the very
fact of your knowledge of it
yet the existence of virtue depends
entirely upon
way is this thought clear to you that
that
distinction between virtue and art
said an art not exercise is still an art
the virtue not exercise is not virtue
is this clear
but is it illustrated well a person
doesn't act
virtuously you can't
if he never acts acts brave
he cannot be a bright man
but on the other hand the men may never
practice
medicine and have a complete possession
of the art of medicine
philosophers in their corners are
continually beginning in
which i think which we could translate
more strongly by the consummation of
affection
yes but there is no principle enunciated
by the philosophers
at least none that is just an honor that
has not been discovered and established
by those who have drawn up
law or safety let us stop here do you
see what israel says
it is it is not so that the statesmen
merely complete that
to which the philosophers have led the
foundation
but the philosophers say nothing
that is sound which has not been
established by political man
so that the statesmen are superior
as he says in the secret to the
philosophers
in wisdom itself it
i mean disregarding for the time being
all critical considerations
we must first understand the thesis of
this
is is a receipt given its premises
the conclusion really follows if what
the philosophers
do depends and sends essentially
on the founding acts of
statesmen and then the philosophers
formulate that somehow express it
succinctly and
therefore yearly and then this
is again used for states of sciences
consummation
in the actions of salesmen again
one can rightly say that philosophy is
in every respect
inferior to statesmanship if the
premises are correct the conclusion
follows
i mean by the way the letter thesis is
not surprising to us
at all i mean if you take a very popular
view today
according to which philosophy
is the articulation
of the values of a given society
i think one can say that according to a
very
widespread view political theory
especially
is that the articulation of the values
of a given society
say of the american society or whatever
it may be now what does it in this case
the philosopher
merely articulates what has been
laid down by other people by society
but society is a vague word who laid it
down
not an anonymous society we can trace it
back to
founding fathers being the declaration
of independence
or be the constitution and this physical
philosophers would
build on a foundation erected by states
and would be in the service of
political action in which their own work
finds its completion
that is the first that is the argument
with which this all starts
he goes on to develop the point that
political activity
not only most noble
which in a way has proven already but
also
pleasant does this make sense
sometimes examples
are more convincing than any broad
argument
at the end of the gathering storm
sheridan churchill tells the story how
he was
called to become prime minister
he has a sentence which unfortunately i
do not know by half
you know in this terrible situation in
1940
and an incredible responsibility and
good
was it only a burden to
church then do you remember what he said
he said is that he slept excellently
after he got his own because facts
are more pleasant than the fact
that he had power you know and could
uh could so political activity one can
understand that
that political activity is less than
everyone could say i suppose even some
lesser
political lights would admit
that political activity is not at all
unpleasant to them
after having established that the
political life
is superior to the theological life
he examines the reasons which
which are advanced by the opponents of
the political life
now these fellows say speak
of the labors of political life compare
and reasonable theoretical man
sitting in his study and paying his
taxes
if he has income but on the other is
not concerned with other people's
business and he enjoys himself by
leading the most wonderful things which
were ever written
that seems to be much more attractive
than the hustle and bustle of classical
life
but this is not only the labor there
also the dangers
because the dangers indicated by the
fact
even in our civilized modern america
that the president is shielded by secret
servicemen
whereas people like you and me do not
need
secret servicemen unless they go to 63rd
street
i say this with a due to a fact which we
have
had an unfortunate incident in our
department another point which they also
mentioned is the
ingratitude of the citizens which is
also not
merely ancient history i refer again to
church and story
when he was defeated in 46 was it 46
yeah oh yes
it was no longer impossible 45 when he
said
well he accepted it in good ways
he said is a democracy especially
is ungrateful and that he could not
expect the difference caesarea
applies replies as follows the
philosophers themselves
risks their lives because
for example traveling i mean if you want
a philosophy
is used in ancient times in the wild
sense where it means
any theoretical history now if you want
to
learn in for certain purposes you have
to try
not only in order to speak to other
theoretical men who don't
happen to live in the place where you
live but also for someone to see
all the nations to see the rivers
or the beasts or the plants
and so on and traveling overseas
in this thing of them especially is very
dangerous as again illustrated
by the fate of the queen mary now you
know
it was such a goal that even this queen
of the ocean
arrived safely i think you read that
furthermore
yeah that was a terrific game
it's agreement you haven't got two days
later
furthermore the labors compensated
are commentated by honor and glory the
labors of the states
and also the joy derived from the
recognition of the good
outweighs the pain derived from the
triumph of the bad
but the main most important point is one
is obliged to compensate one's country
for what it has done for oneself it has
permitted a man to grow to develop
and he owes it that
there is one thing the necessity
to mix with mean people
if you go into politics that i believe
is as true today as it was in the past
that is at least your opinion yeah yeah
but
this law replies the only alternative
to mixing with people is to be ruled by
them
and therefore is better to mix with them
than
to be ruled by them this argument has a
prehistory which some of you may
remember
pam
the opponents of the practical life
admit
that in case of a necessity
the wise men will enter politics
who aren't do you know any of these wise
men
i mean you don't have to be an aquarian
that are
quite well known men that in case of
necessity a wise man would end up
politics
again plato in the republic he would not
enter politics except on the basis of
some
a divine chance of greater conflict but
that means
necessity then cesaro has a powerful
argument against god
how can he do that properly
if he has not trained himself
in quiet times in advance
is it not absurd to say the wise men
should go into politics only
in very critical situations where
you must already be an old hand
and have a sure hand which you can only
acquire by experience
and this is therefore not necessary to
go
into politics as soon as you are
properly prepared for it
this israel continues as follows this is
from paragraph 9 to
10 11 now
the opponents both of their complete
ignorance of political matters
in flagrant contradiction to their
admission
that in critical situation the wise men
would go into politics now who
are they these men who boast of their
complete ignorance of political matters
in flagrant contradiction to their
admission
they would go into politics if there is
a really critical situation
do you remember anyone yes someone or mr
murray
have you ever heard that a writer prior
to citizen
i mean whom you make right
boasting of his ignorance and politics
yes who did you you
know
cicero could not argue with a
chicago politician for very obviously
i'm going
the most obvious statement which occurs
to me at the end rate
is a statement in plato's dialogue the
statesman
in which the theoretical man is
presented
by stroker no no okay no i'm sorry you
know this
statement the theaters nonsense
in which the theoretical life is
discussed and presented
and sugar says here of the theoretical
man abhantib is fully proven
that he is called he doesn't even know
the way to the marketplace
and he doesn't know anything of laws and
he doesn't even know whether his
neighbor is a human being or some other
kind of animal exposing of ignorance of
political matters
yeah and and of course israel rightly is
absolutely preposterous if the same man
demands that people should help their
city
in a grave situation how can they make
such
a fantastic claim i
do not go into the question now what
sogates
means with this statement in the
theaters uh it would
i would suspect that this ironical but
so that is not a very useful statement
because
one must always know what
is the use of theological statements
a joker you know a crown he meant
something right
but here we have the difference yet
cesaro goes on to say
there are philosophers of the highest
rank
who did not participate in political
life
yet studied political science
the name occurred census revenues
and thus somehow fulfilled
a political function now first do we
understand that why a student of
political science
has this very fact
fulfilled the political fountain does
this make sense
do we understand that it means that
that voting is a political function
everywhere
but why should studying political
science be a positive
function i mean studying political
methods trying to understand them
is not a hard question
to me yeah but what does this
word so frequently used now identify
me do you mean to say that every student
of politics must
become a member of a party as republican
or democratic or maybe the independent
voters or what do you mean
no i didn't mean that yeah i didn't mean
that he had to become a member of the
party
because that's right
i have a feeling that i'm involved in
learning to identify the uh
political area yeah but what does
identify mean that word i really don't
understand your disconnection
no when you say you don't understand
my term of identification i don't i feel
like i'm out at sea
the feeling that i expressed is valid
for me
yeah but in other words do you mean yeah
yeah but i still i mean i know that
english is not my mother tongue
but i also know that the word
identifying
in this sense is of very recent use in
english and it has something to do with
certain
psychological theories about identity
and identification well i
i think of it in terms of distinguishing
the political from the economic
yeah why is this a political function
why
why do you exercise the political
function by understanding political
things
and doing nothing more but trying to
understand
it this is an extremely simple thing you
are
if i may say so falsely sophisticated
forgiving for in in your way yeah
i mean it is extremely simple what
cesaro means you have a citizen body
is in a democracy and this citizen body
is
ultimately responsible for the
decisions at least by elect by the hack
of election
is it not more is it not important that
the citizen body
is informed rather than uninformed
it's a political scientist is a man
who tries i mean if he's really an
empirical political scientist and not a
methodologist
as an empirically a scientist he tries
to become an in
more informed political citizen
than most citizens are and
by in this way he contributes to the
raising of the level of the citizen body
because he cannot help to some extent
spreading that higher degree of
information you know
in a drug store conversation comes up
and he can tell people sometimes
it's not so simple as you look you have
your facts wrong
and so on so if that's a very simple
thing what he means
now if this is done already in the most
comprehensive way
and cedro is of course thinking here not
of people like ourselves but of plato
and aristotle
and it's really a political function
which they're fulfilled by because they
give
their their fellow citizens and
even the citizens of other societies
some
help in finding their bearing in
political matters all together
that is a political function but mr
sassini was going to say that
he uses it that these statements
these uh
that in turn comes down to this well
played on arsenal that is a perfectly
defensible position
yeah that is a perfectly defensible
position because they did not run away
from their civic duties
their very study of politics even if
they didn't never
acted politically was a service to the
city
to the politicians yeah you're referring
them to that
activity of the political student which
is uh
in effect
opinion leader is a word now
used in order and politically informed
man is more likely to be an
opinion leader in the desirable sense
than a politically uninformed that i
believe
makes sense so what
here we have reached the end of the
introduction
and you see the the end of this
discussion
is strangely favorable to the
philosophers
at least to those philosophers like
plato and aristotle
who regarded political philosophy as an
essential part
of philosophy but still on the whole
the the burden of this argument in the
reduction is
the practical political life is much
higher than theoretical
now then in paragraph 13
the transition to the dialogue takes
place is on page 29.
says in a word that he will going
we will report of the conversation
on politics which has taken place
about 70 years before
and he knows of it through
a certain individual called rutilius
rufus whom he and brother bandage
had met when they were studying in
smyrna
asian minor and this little
bittersweet we can assume that this is a
piece of fiction you know
it is utterly unimportant whether it's
fiction or not but
i would assume that these things are
fiction
and it's yeah now this
is the so it is it is why cicero did not
write the discussion which we shall read
is not
a discussion by scetara
it is a discussion by statesmen say two
generations before citizens
and the most famous of them mentioned
there
is one of this cpus
the cpu who conquered
carthage in bonneville who congratulate
a great statesman captain
and the city rules chose him probably
for this reason as it appears from an
illusion
cpu was a very highly educated roman
at least whatever the bandits may have
been involved at that time
and one of his companions was
politicians you see so
that's a linga you know it was not that
damned foreign
the discussion begins in the following
way
in episode 14 to 16
there is the holiday europe there's the
latin holidays
and cpu is at home
it is a year of the death of cpu which
is very important for certain things
which complains
and then a young man appears called uber
and there is first a brief discussion
with two below
14 to 16. tupelo comes
first because because he wants to find
out
cpu's private of
whoever has interest begin to read
mr sachin
page 31
africanus
shall we not first acquire before the
others arrive
it's important before the father's
rights the private conversation
what the facts are in regard to that
second son that has been reported
to the senate for those who claim to
have seen two sons on either few
but somewhat modified so we may mention
that
investigation of such celestial
phenomena as well as of other matters
but together to give you my current
opinion i do not entirely approve of
your friends habit in all matters at
this time
dealing with things of whose nature we
can hardly get an influence by
conjecture he speaks with such assurance
that one would think
that he could see them with his own eyes
or actually touch them in the sand
i always consider socrates who have
shown greater wisdom in refusing to take
any interest in such
matters and maintaining that the
problems of natural phenomena
are either too difficult for human
understanding
or else for of no importance
the criticism of theoretical philosophy
which was originally given merely in the
name of
political life is now traced to a
philosopher to socrates
who allegedly said we should not be
concerned with purely theoretical
objects natural phenomena but only
the survived life of man and this view
is taken by the greatest roman authority
useful for civil purposes now in this
sequel
a tubular prize well that's not true
sugarless was not such a strictly
morally strict monolithic he also dealt
with other things
and sigil says well no i know that
better
that's not slogan that was plato we did
to transform the moralist prophetess
into a metaphysician
which makes sense which shows of course
that studio
was at least reasonably informed
about philosophical matters that he
could make such a mistake
then two other men appear phelous
and rudel rutilius is a man who is
the link between cesaro and the whole
conversation
filos will be very important later on
because
philos is the academic skeptic
you remember the academic skeptic
who criticized the doctrine of natural
law
he will be very important now
cpu mentions the fact
yeah here there is a very strange thing
cpu
telstra uh tells its newcomer
what the subject was this natural
physical phenomenon
now let us see in paragraph 17 on page
35
after this speech notice a lucious
glorious student that was coming in
unannounced and after greeting him with
the greatest mortality
super saiyan led him to a place on his
own power
cochlears who chileans uh who later
reported the conversation to us
came in at the same time receiving
tripio's reading
that was given a place besides
why do you discuss it i hope our arrival
has not interrupted your conversation
certainly not for the point which
trevero began to inquire for a short
time
that you are always interested in
investigating as for our friend lucille
he used to discuss such topics with me
occasionally even under the very walls
of
vermont yeah stop here do you see
something
sibiu pretended to be a strict socratic
not to be concerned at all with the
explanation of any natural phenomena
and what we do we find out now that
yes yeah
even in uh during in millions
on campaigns yeah when they when they
when they
they had led siege to pneumonia and
they discuss it so cicero
his typical universe is not as
anti-theoretical as he sees let me make
the book ends with a dream of schedule
see your character dream says
and this is a presentation
of cosmology the whole universe
it is not a myth is meant to be
so cpu reveals at the end
in the form of a tree the theoretical
understanding of the word
which was always there as well
in the political military activities
it did not come to life and it should
not come to life
as such that is prepared you see
the first step is no sugars what's right
only human things are interesting the
second said
oh yes very much that we can make
to the city i was prepared to listen
to physical discussions and later on
we will find soon as a much more serious
reason for that
so the innovative question of the
theology and practical life
is not settled in caesarea's
introduction
it is a subject which keeps the whole
book
moving i think that the
theoretical republic is probably his
greatest work
from an artistic point of view and i
think we will see that in spite of the
fragmentary character
of the work now cpu had discussed
physical questions under the walls of
pneumonia
with routilius firos
is also concerned with these matters
also tubal as
the men who came first and came with
this question
speaking now this change the scene
changes again
the most important of these the most
important of these figures the names you
will easily forget and could forget
the only person who must be kept in mind
is laelius because
laelius is a man who presents a natural
lotion
later on lellius
is an old roman lawyer
the chief justice the most respected
authority and matters of law
to whom cicero escape your decker
and his central importance is indicated
by the fact
that when they sit down please sits
in the center
they sit down on a meadow
but it is winter time
and so they can't sit down on any place
they wish they have to seek a special
place what kind of place would they seek
in the winter's day
the snow and rain are out of the quest
otherwise they couldn't sit outside
what place would they see
sunny surely in summer they would
find six shades now this
is a symbolism because plato had used in
the laws
that the laws are discussed taking place
on the hottest day of the year the
longest year very hot day
and they seek shame here
they seek the sun now what is the
meaning
of said symbol singing the shade
sings the sun it's not difficult to
guess
because of those laws which we shall
need afterwards
are in a summertime this is the winter
international
now what what
what would you expect just
that's it so here in this dialogue it's
the same from the noise of success
in this sequel in manga 19 or so
many states this socratic
field as we might call it the view
we limit ourselves to the study of human
things of things which are concerned
of concern to us but he is a very
tolerant deliberate man he does not
object to the discussion
of a physical question especially
since there is holiday you know there is
no
political or judicial matter before them
and why
should he not speak on such a location
also
of physical matters and legos is an
educated man it appears that he knows
plato's republic very good and so on and
so on
let us put the question very simply as
follows
what is the question of the two sides
there's no concern the question of
the two roman peoples is a problem
meaning referring to the civil wars of
the
approaching civil war that was the age
of the black eyes you know they're
crying and law and all this kind of
thing
the roman people split
this duality of rome
this is much more important
than for a roman than the duality of
sons as a simple and respectable
position which it takes but whether it
is sufficient
is other matter now in the discussion
let us turn to paragraph 23
that is on page 43.
it is sufficient to reach this single
paragraph uh it's a
second time up on page 43 it is a
fragmented
passage for myself
i was aware that it was also greatly
esteemed and beloved by my father
for in my early youth when my father
then council was in macedonia
and i was in camp with him i recognized
that our army was on one occasion
discerned by superstitious fears because
on a cloudless night of right full moon
with something
dark gauss was at that time
it being then about a year before his
election
and on the next day he unhesitatedly
made a public statement in the can
that this was no miracle but that had
happened at that time
that would always happen at fixed times
in the future when the sun was in such a
position
that its life could not reach the rule
yeah let us see
that you might read two surprises then
and then we
stop there do you really need to say
that he could convince men who were
little more than simple peasants of such
a thing
but i dares even to stated before
yeah now what what is the point cpu
tries here to
show that the study of
natural phenomena is not
only harmless a harmless past
time in which you can indulge in on
holidays
but that is even very important for the
most important
political activity namely war
a panic because of an eclipse absolutely
then a scientist comes and tells them
there is nothing
nothing ominous about it that's as
simple as a certain emotions of
father is here only these bodies are so
big and so luminous
and there is no secret behind this it's
not ominous
and he makes soldiers better fighters
this is not an eminently
good political function that is
now i do know that the
bearing of this argument
is not immediately clear perhaps
i will try to explain
according to the older notion
classically developed by aristotle
the highest quality of the
statesman is prudence
political rules political province has
its own principles which
are not derived from any natural science
so that they aren't known or become
known to man
in the cause of his life action
that is the sphere of action
the sphere of truth is
a kind of a closed sphere you do not
need except in a strictly subordinate
way
other knowledge for so you need of
course all kinds of experts regardless
of that matter but they have to obey the
states
they can only advise the statement they
cannot make a decision
but there is this difficult
this whole sphere of prudence
may be threatened
by wrongs to your radical opinions
for example today a western statesman
thinking prudentially about what should
be done
is confronted by the fact
that he has opponents
who do not act prudentially strictly
speaking
i mean they're coming but men who are
guided
in their actions by a certain
theory this so-called materialistic
philosophy of literally
dialectical materialism therefore it
becomes
necessary for the state to
face in order to face this issue as mr
dallas recommended
the reading of the book by
overstretchers see that this
becomes a politically important thing to
get informed about that
something of this kind exists at all
times there are always
false theoretical things which endanger
the prevention
handling of human affairs and there is
always therefore necessary
as theoretical defense
of the prudential sphere
those who know a bit of palestine i
believe will understand what i mean
but not every one of you know charleston
and perhaps not okay and not everyone
who knows i would
have been kind of understood what i mean
because
therefore i would like to find out
whether i make myself understood
i tried to explain this through this
process what does the states mean
no i mean apart from this obviously has
to know
these countries
enemies and all other things
without which without the acceptance of
which most states and
is
he does not need theoretical
knowledge knowledge of the nature of
things
seems to be perfectly self-sufficient
that is
is this by
depends on
the time that this year of rules is not
invaded i thought she already blocked
which make important i think
no
therefore it is necessary
um
is an example of uh factual theoretical
knowledge
uh i take it from
that you're when you talk about
discussion
uh
the decisions
yes it seems to me there's a certain
following because uh
as we go across
if you have to call on an expert you
know but this does not hurt the
self-sufficiency of the political sphere
the uh the politics
why can't the argument be be made it is
still self-sufficient
to defend himself because in this other
matter of theoretical
for this reason because
this common sense aristotelian notion
of the self-sufficiency of the potential
sphere
is the ninth person
and has been denied by people
who speak at all times you see
and uh more in modern times than a dream
surely but it is that is therefore a
defense
needed you know if a man has a
philosophy of history
like the communists say then of course
in a way they are not free fruit you
know they have what they call a tactics
which is their way of
food but fundamentally the whole thing
is
improving because it is based on the
premise
that they know what
the outcome of this development is
prudence we can say is negatively
constant
by the fact that the future is unknown
in the moment you assume that there is
knowledge of the future
you act on the basis of an entirely
hypothetical principle which
deflects from food for example the
willingness to reach some
compromise in the present case would be
greater if the communists were
not sure not as sure as they are
that they will surely win the whole
globe for their system
i mean you know that would for them
a compromise would be a merely practical
concession
it could never be a genuine peace policy
and i think it shows in infinite
varieties of ways
now there is let us go on so
let us you must always see that in the
context of the argument
it is a gradual rehabilitation
of theoretical philosophy and the first
step is to simply
try you know that you you need some
physics
as some natural signs in order to
prevent panics in your armies as
if you knew from his own experience
but simply goes much beyond that
in this sequel in paragraphs 26
to 29 he develops
a great theme which i
believe we should read although it is
very late
but it's a very important message for
this israel's whole album i think we
begin
on the bottom of page 47.
of all berated that he has realized the
meaning of eternity
or as glorious that he has perceived how
small is the earth
not only the earth as a whole but
especially that part of it which is
inhabited by
men and has noticed how we romans a
compliant
scandal portion of it an entirely
unknown
many races of men hope nevertheless that
our name will be born of war
abroad by wings it will spread to the
end of the earth
you see how idiotic the assertion is
that for the romans or the educated
romans the roman empire
was the uni the
society comprising all men
you know there was a certain ocean in
the world
of a cosmopolitan of a community
comprising
all men and people say
well the romans identified
their state the roman empire
with that cosmopolitan that universal
society
are there such foods cicero was not from
he knew as though he had very little
geographical knowledge compared with
what the
school charges today but he knew that
this was not a universal
empire but that was limited to a
relatively small part of the globe
yes but as far as our lands houses heard
there are many swords of silver and gold
and concerned the man who never thinks
of these things or speaks of them as
good
because he sees that the enjoyment of
them is slight they usefulness
their ownership uncertainty and has
noticed that the violence of men
often possesses them in our measured
abundance how fortunate is he
to be esteemed for only such a man can
really claim all things as his own
by virtue of the decision not of the
roman people
but of the wise not by any obligation of
the civil war
but by the common law of nature which
forbids that anything shall belong to
any man
say to him that knows how to employ and
use it
only such a man will consider that our
military commands and
concernships are the requests among
things necessary
rather than things desire and let us
stop here for a moment
here is the word law of nature of course
here for the first time
and here it is used by schedule now what
does this
law of nature say
the common law of nature
it is distinguished as it is natural
from the civil law the
example here is this the property which
a man
owns belongs to him
according to the civil law to the law of
the land
but what does the common law of
nature say it's distinguished from the
civilian
the civil law says a thing belongs to a
man
if he has legally acquired it for
example by inheritance by purchase
or whichever the legal base may be
was a gift but what does it what was the
common law of
nature regarding problems
a thing belongs to a man who can
properly use it
so in other words a rich playboy
to take a very simple case has no
right to his property it's illegal
and if the civil law says this is
probably legally
that is a very another view of the
matter
if you think this little things rule
by the way there is a very good
commentary on that
written some centuries prior to cesaro
and one
is xenophon's economic
the beginning and the other is very
famous
it's precious to public because that's
what is what plato
implies if it doesn't explicitly teach
according to the common view justice
means to leave everyone
or leave everyone in the possession of
what belongs to him
or give him the possession of what
belongs to
what belongs to a man is here
presupposed
to be defined by the civil law by the
positive law
and here's a great question rise but
what about the positive law itself
the positive one after all may be unjust
and therefore by doing
by acting legally
you act in a deeper sense unjustly
if the law is unjust if you
radicalize it it is as it is stunned by
plato by xenophon by the stoics
and by cesaro who follows them here
the consequence is that there cannot be
private property strictly speaking
that's a simple indication of that if
everyone
can own justice
only what he can use says to say use
very financially useful
and then some wise man
who has the judgment on that must assign
to each man what is good for him and
what he can use what he could be how he
used that
and then of course and if he proves to
be unworthy of it
he will take it very much it's no
private problem
that is a single argument underlying
greatest republic
developed more explicitly by xenophon in
economicals at the beginning and taken
for granted here by egypt
that is a very grave assertion and it is
surely not stevio's last word otherwise
he could not in decency have been a
roman
council naturally but it is a part of
the problem
why is it so crucially important
and no society can possibly
private property with all its
foolishness
then civil society is necessary
on a very low moral level
is
highest
that is continuous
himself what my grandfather apocalypse
used to say
according that he was never doing more
than when he was doing nothing
and nevertheless alone
you see that is a simple expression of
the theoretical line
because the practical life consists
in action and consists necessarily
in action together with others
politicians
yes well who can really believe that
god's issues
when by the greatest exertions he
deprived us fellow citizens of their
liberty
was doing more than archimedes one of
those citizens
when he made that very flow in which we
have spoken
in making what he appeared
themselves or as we may say participate
in the gathering of most murdered men
finding delight in their discoveries and
writing
well i mean you should i
i urge those of you who want to
have some benefits from this course to
read the whole first book
you cannot read the whole thing
but i can only say and i believe you
will convince yourself
reading that as 6 cpu sets here that's
4th here
contrary to everything said before the
supremacy of the theoretical life
and in this connection the term
the common law of nature
occurs for the first time
and we must see later on what the
political meaning
of this statement is common law of
nature
we may say is that law
which the wise man and
only the wise man that has a theoretical
man
obeys what is the use
of that natural law operating society
that would be one question
i would like to mistake only very
briefly
the secret of the first book
language requests mailers you know the
lawyers
where it is that says the chief justice
request gives you to tell them what he
regards as the best
form of civil society the best regime
and the answer which he gives
is this the best regime
is a mixture mix
of monarchy aristocracy and democracy
but ladies insist on
cpu answering the question which regime
he would prefer if he had to accept a
simple regime meaning either monarchy or
aristocracy
or a democracy and severe others
monarchy
now he gives of course reasons for all
these choices which are also in this
and maybe i do take up some of these
points
at our next meeting because after all we
must understand that and it's better
we believe one
and a bit less incisal and understand
something then more and others
now is there any point which you would
like to bring up
as i said i cannot meet you guys on on
thursday
but from then on i hope to have no
interruption whatever
let me summarize what is going on
in the in the beginning of this work and
god is in a way the theme of the whole
book
that is the great question
of the relation of the theoretical and
the practice life
a question which of course must have
been a very
existential question for caesar himself
who was a very great statesman
in spite of what some people said and
also
a very great writer
we must never forget that it was cicero
who brought philosophy into rome
in such a way that he made
philosophy acceptable to raw there had
been someone with some other writers
what one of them are very great poets
who had written philosophic books prior
to the level
but they did not bring about
the marriage of philosophy and
rome with scissors
in this respect israel fulfills the same
function
for rome which a plato fulfilled for
greece
there were philosophers increased before
plato
but that philosophy became
acceptable respectable
a part of higher education as a matter
of course
that was plagiarism as an ancient writer
luke bluth testifies the same i think we
can say of this one
now the great question that is a
theoretical and practical life
scenario's most
private question but at the same time of
course a question
which is not only scissors question but
a question for every
single man or woman
uh we will uh take this up and you will
see in the sixth book
in this dream of schedule since
cicero is trying to find a solution
more favorable to political activity
than say plato's and aristotle
so you should wars but fundamentally
it is the platonic aristotelian position
and your whole doctor
is platonic analysis and even
i have indicated by this example of the
common law of nature
you know the common law of nature is a
close connection between that
and that and plato
and xenophon as a piece of merely
historic
information i would like to say this
we know very little of these stories you
know
we have only five minutes of them the
first
writer who gives us a call here in the
next position of historic position
is sizzle in uh on the hands
of good men but only in moral philosophy
now we do know however one thing that's
historic school
emerged out of a school founded by a
direct
puberty of socrates and that was
untested and the school is called the
cynical school now cynical does not have
the meaning which it is today
you know that's it but cynical
and what cynical means yeah what
what can one say about the president
cynical school was an extremely
non-political school let me see
a school concern entirely with the
private perfection and the private life
of the individual
because it is a no way in impressive
school but it is of some
interest because it's a crude version of
one element of what we have in play to
another
a complete rejection of convention
in the name of nature on the basis of
circuits
here this is one part of this album now
it integrates
the scenic school somehow prepares
historic school
in the current presentation of stories
this cynical origin of sources so to be
completely forgotten
and we must take cognizance proper
cognizance of it in order to understand
the story teaching because that is the
teaching which within
certain limits cicero adopted
and that is as i said at the beginning
the oldest coherent presentation of the
natural law
doctrine which we will find in the third
book
of the republic and in the first book of
the laws
uh but keep always in mind this
question today owing to
the current preoccupations
underlined by a crypto marxism which
affects
day thought very much people always
think of when they read cesaro
by of course a roman
belong to a certain roman clan
the highest and
treat his books in that perspective
and they do not sufficiently pay
attention to the fact
that however much cizro might have been
influenced by any
roman and glass violence
he was a pupil of
philosophers and in a way himself a
philosopher
and we try to take takes his
teaching seriously and try to understand
him
it may be wrong but we cannot even
dream of discussing its possible
wrongness if we don't even understood it
first
and for this purpose it is necessary to
see
the great importance which scissor
attaches to the
whole question of the theoretical and
practical
and the first discussion i mean it will
go on throughout the book
now next time we will have the benefit
of the paper by mr kendrick
yes
