"This ambitious study brings together three great thinkers of ancient and modern times-Husserl, Locke, and Plato-in a careful analysis of the problem of knowledge, of what the unassisted human mind can know and how it may know what it does. I know of no other work that even attempts to do what this study does so well: to bring into respectful but critical dialogue with one another these three philosophers on the question "what is knowledge?"" --Robert C. Bartlett, Behrakis Professor in Hellenic Political Studies, Boston College, USA Relativism, or the claim that it is possible that the appearances and opinions of each of us are correct for each of us, and hence that any view is as true as any other, has remained a continuing problem for philosophy and science for 2,500 years. Today, because of the widespread acceptance of relativism, the problem is greater than ever before. This book argues that Plato in fact solved this problem. In the first two chapters, by means of a study of Husserl and Locke, Davis shows that it is possible to return to and take seriously Plato's treatment of this problem. The third chapter presents Plato's solution to it. This book is distinctive in that it shows that a problem that has been thought to be present throughout the history of Western thought was in fact solved by Plato, and in that it shows that we can, beginning from our contemporary situation, return to Plato's solution. Matthew K. Davis is former Dean and Director of Graduate Programs at St. John's College, Santa Fe, USA, where he has taught for twenty-five years.

Relativism, or the claim that it is possible that the appearances and opinions of each of us are correct for each of us, and hence that any view is as true as any other, has remained a continuing problem for philosophy and science for 2,500 years. Today, because of the widespread acceptance of relativism, the problem is greater than ever before. This book argues that Plato in fact solved this problem. In the first two chapters, by means of a study of Husserl and Locke, Davis shows that it is possible to return to and take seriously Plato’s treatment of this problem. The third chapter presents Plato’s solution to it. This book is distinctive in that it shows that a problem that has been thought to be present throughout the history of Western thought was in fact solved by Plato, and in that it shows that we can, beginning from our contemporary situation, return to Plato’s solution.

The first study of Strauss’s confrontation with modern science and its methods. Drawing upon a wealth of previously unpublished archival material, Leo Strauss on Science brings to light the thoughts of Leo Strauss on the problem of science. Introducing us to Strauss’s reflections on the meaning and perplexities of the scientific adventure, Svetozar Y. Minkov explores questions such as: Is there a human wisdom independent of science? What is the relation between poetry and mathematics, or between self-knowledge and theoretical physics? And how necessary is it for the human species to exist immutably in order for the classical analysis of human life to be correct? In pursuing these questions, Minkov aims to change the conversation about Strauss, one of the great thinkers of the past century.

Please note this is a 'Palgrave to Order' title (PTO). Stock of this book requires shipment from an overseas supplier. It will be delivered to you within 12 weeks. This book shows in detail the Enlightenment origin of the US Constitution. It provides vivid analysis of how the Enlightenment's basic ideas were reformulated in the context of America.

This volume comprises original articles by leading authors – from philosophy as well as sociology – in the debate around relativism in the sociology of (scientific) knowledge. Its aim has been to bring together several threads from the relevant disciplines and to cover the discussion from historical and systematic points of view. Among the contributors are Maria Baghramian, Barry Barnes, Martin Endreß, Hubert Knoblauch, Richard Schantz and Harvey Siegel.

In Subjectivity, sixteen leading scholars examine the turn to the subject in modern philosophy and consider its historical antecedents in ancient and medieval thought. Some critics of modernity reject the turn to the subject as a specifically modern error, arguing that it logically leads to nihilism and moral relativism by divorcing the human mind from objective reality. Yet, some important thinkers of the last half-century--including Leo Strauss, Eric Voegelin, John Finnis, and Bernard Lonergan--consider a subjective starting point and claim to find a similar position in ancient and medieval thought. If correct, their positions suggest that one can adopt the subjective turn and remain true to the tradition. This is a timely question. The common good of our polity encounters a situation in which many believe that there is no objective reality to which human minds and wills ought to conform, a conclusion that suggests we can define and construct reality. In light of this, the notion of a natural or objective reality to which human beings ought to conform becomes particularly vital. Should we, then, adopt the modern turn to subjectivity and argue for objective truth and moral order on its basis, or reject the subjective turn as part of the problem and return to an earlier approach that grounds these things in nature or some other external reality? Critics of modern subjectivity argue that the modern turn to subjectivity must be abandoned because it is the very source of the nominalism that threatens to undermine liberal democracy. Others argue, however, that subjectivity itself logically leads to the recognition of an objective reality beyond the mind of the individual. Edited by R. J. Snell and Steven F. McGuire, this collection will be of particular interest to intellectual historians, political philosophers, theologians, and philosophers.