> of society that Plato *seems* to recommend in *Laws* has ultimate power
> invested in a (rather secretive) council of citizens; the ancient Greek
I got distracted while writing this, meant to add one more thing. The
emphasis on "seems" in that sentence is because the *Laws* is INFAMOUSLY
difficult to give a straightforward and clear reading of. Positions that
Plato seems to be recommending in one place in the text get directly
contradicted at many others---happens for almost every major claim. It
seems all in all to be much more a work of exploration than of
proclamation.
> defense of "American" freedom was given in Locke's *Two Treatises of
> Government*---it would be hard to think of any sort of freedom Americans
> care about (freedom of speech, religion, press and congregation, protected
> suffrage, due process of law, equal treatment under the law, etc.) not
> delineated and defended in those works, which were written, recall, in the
> late 17th century under the rule of a king---and they defended all these
> freedoms as proper social structures that *should* exist under a king.
Also, I meant to emphasize that Locke thought that these freedoms in fact
could *only* exist and be protected under a king (at least on the most
straightforward reading of the *Treatises*, but they also are notoriously
difficult to get through hermeneutically unscathed).
E
--
Erik Curiel
almost web-engineer/would-be philosopher
"The affairs of human beings are not worthy of great seriousness,
and yet we must take them seriously."
---Plato, *The Laws*
_______________________________________________
Bits mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.sugoi.org/mailman/listinfo/bits
