Speaking of Straussian readings of obscure thinkers, here is one from the 14th century
He established the foundations of historiography, sociology, ethnography, and economics, among other disciplines. Maybe being from the time and faith that he is he will show us how to look at the world differently? Let’s just say that if he was an Averroist then he “knew some things”.
Right from the get-go
for Ibn Khaldun, the aim of the study of history is prudent action
This same writer, Muhsin Mahdi, has a later book on a thinker from the 10th century who established the foundations of political philosophy. So think of Khaldun in that causative light. No, it’s not all bowing to Mecca over in those “dunes”.
Odd that Mahdi seems to synonymize these
philosophy of history, or his new science of culture
Strauss guided this work by the way – we have more than just those books and lectures that are “his”, at least in a sense. I’d like to find a list of these!
What a dangerous concept
If you’re reading this you’re probably such a jaded person. Do you like to live a double-life?
The cycles of civilizations. It isn’t a “reactionary myth”, it’s an undeniable fact where ours is at.
Khaldun knew something about the West of that time through Christian merchants he met, so this isn’t going to be exactly a picture like my favorite uncontacted tribe. Still, it’s bound to be more alien than anything from a Christian country, and at the same time more familiar than a Chinese work, say.
We also know that history was one of the main subjects studied by scholars like Ibn Khaldun who were planning for a career in government.
History, i.e. our history. The more of a zealous true-believer the better.
How to synthesize the Quran with past events – that’s what makes it different from what we do today. Nonetheless, a sacred history is a sacred history. People are fanatical about it and hold it to be of utmost importance, that’s why it could be called “sacred”.
Studying this, I get the thought that whenever a leftist speaks they might as well be waving a storybook titled Holocaust in your face and saying “See! See? See?!” Nice storybook, is that the basis of all your arguments? I’ll concede that “forgive the sinners” is a Christian thing, it’s just the manipulation of a potentially good thing. “You’re implying that it was sinners who the Nazis killed?” Oh right, I’m like four steps of reasoning beyond the standard interpretation of the events. Do you even reverence? No reverence is even allowed that doesn’t presuppose the First Reverence. I guess I’m a sort of “pagan” then. There’s a reverence that is possible that is prior to that.
Huh. Contra Badiou
Math is its own kind of clouds that runs the risk of getting too far from practical reality. For our politicians though ANY clouds are good clouds. This is not a concern, they’re “too close to practical reality” so to speak. These zealous history-believers, shiveringly reverent to such a degree they can’t even face the monument directly. At least the Muslims pray to theirs- “our mecca” is too sacred to even speak of directly as a religious “site”. Don’t you like to know how most people in the west are objects? This is the fundamental way they are. It’s so sublime it scares them into being objects in its service. Any type of blank-slatist is in its service.
Anyway this monograph was published in 1957 and so far it’s a pretty good supplementary text to books published by Strauss around that time.