Leo Strauss: "Jerusalem and Athens"

 Leo Strauss’s essay "Jerusalem and Athens" is one of his most influential works, tackling what he considered the fundamental tension of Western civilization: the conflict between Revelation (Jerusalem) and Reason (Athens).

Strauss argues that the West does not have one single root, but two, and that these two roots are in a state of "irreconcilable opposition."


The Core Conflict: Obedience vs. Inquiry

At the heart of the essay is the distinction between two different ways of life:

FeatureJerusalem (The Bible)Athens (Greek Philosophy)
FoundationFaith and divine revelation.Reason and independent inquiry.
Highest VirtueObedience to God's law.Wisdom through the pursuit of truth.
Starting PointFear of God is the beginning of wisdom.Wonder/Doubt is the beginning of wisdom.
The "Good Life"A life of holiness and trust in the Unknowable.A life of contemplation and self-reliance.

1. The Biblical Perspective (Jerusalem)

Strauss analyzes the beginning of Genesis, noting that the Bible does not begin with an argument for God’s existence but with a declaration of His creation. In this worldview, the world is not "nature" (a self-governing system) but a creation. Therefore, the only way to know the ultimate truth is if the Creator chooses to reveal it.

2. The Philosophical Perspective (Athens)

For the Greeks, particularly Socrates, the world is a cosmos governed by "nature" ($physis$). This implies that the world is intelligible and can be understood through human observation and logic without divine assistance. To the philosopher, everything—including the gods—is subject to questioning.


The "Productive Tension"

Strauss makes a bold and somewhat paradoxical claim: The vitality of Western civilization depends on this conflict never being resolved.

  • No Synthesis: He argues that attempts to synthesize the two (like the "Christian Philosophy" of the Middle Ages) often weaken both. If you use reason to prove faith, faith is no longer faith. If you limit reason to fit faith, reason is no longer free.

  • The Mutual Challenge: Because neither side can definitively "disprove" the other—philosophy cannot prove that revelation is impossible, and revelation cannot prove that the philosopher's pursuit is evil—they keep each other honest and vibrant.

"The core of the matter is that the philosopher is the man who knows that he does not know, and the believer is the man who knows that he must obey."


Why It Matters Today

Strauss was writing at a time when he felt modern science and "historicism" were hollowing out the moral foundations of the West. By returning to the tension between Jerusalem and Athens, Strauss was trying to remind us that:

  1. Truth is not easy: We shouldn't settle for "lazy" secularism or "blind" fundamentalism.

  2. Moral Clarity: Both traditions offer profound, albeit different, critiques of the modern world’s obsession with power and technology over virtue.

Would you like me to dive deeper into Strauss’s specific reading of the Book of Genesis or his critique of Socrates within this essay?


Mehr zum Thema "Glaube und Wissen"

Kommentare

Beliebte Posts aus diesem Blog

Warum kann eine KI keine Werturteile fällen, sondern nur Werturteile zitieren?

Gesundheitsvorsorge im Zusammenhang der Bedürfnisstrukturen nach Jean-Pol Martin

Erläutere, weshalb "The Scar of David" in dem Roman "Mornings in Jenin" eine wesentliche Rolle spielt