Para~graph Three!

Endo-terror~cism?

aka Academics ?

The point?  The esoterics of Strauss maybe the Socratics of Plato, or exoterics of Neitzsche.

Ctrl F (academic:~:academics)
:::  aka [a. FOOTNOTE JUNE 2013 PAGE TWO, b. The Daily Counter Balance , c.(J) In the begining... , (D)BoC, e. Belated Breaking News! , f. THE COUNCIL OF NICE , h. Back-Log August 19th, ("religious ghetto") , i.(G).]
:::   ? [a. Looking Back , b. "if I were dictator" , c. What's good for the goose? Goose the gander! , d. Bane(Or) Change , e. Conservative Foray (4A) ,  f. Blame to go around? , g. Will Safire Replaced by Will I ams., h. Academic Freedom , i. Framing Narratives , j. In the begining... , k. Technical Difficulties , l. The Thorn and the Lyin' , m. Running Joke , n. Let me finish? , o. We are at the table. , p.Forward (Ironically)  ]
(what the fudge?  f-j,p?)
:::   Endo-suffix?

The project  ?   The dance? 
"Esotericism is the practice, widely employed by a variety of thinkers prior to and up through the early Enlightenment, of disguising their real meaning through ellipsis, surface contradiction, dispersal of their real arguments, and the like (indeed—they were misleading casual readers about their true intentions!). The understanding that philosophers like Plato and Aristotle made use of esotericism was central to Strauss’s own project of returning to their thought as an antidote to what he called the “crisis of modernity”, since it pointed to deeper truths hidden behind the evident meaning extracted by superficial readers. It was probably also one of the sources of distrust of Strauss and his followers by other academics, since it implied that initiates into the art of esoteric interpretation had access to meanings unavailable to others." Francis Fukuyama.
Or Ecto~tonics of Aristotle?  Less than Ionic that paranormal came up in  English [?]
P.4,The Prince misquote? P.5 "undermine dogmatism" bingo~? P.6 Nietzsche Recurrance
"That latter struggle was ultimately won, and led to the triumph of the “harmonist” view, now almost universally accepted, that philosophical truth could be made compatible with and indeed supportive of modern politics. Transparency is today the name of that venerable game. Classical philosophers like Plato and Aristotle had a different view; namely, that philosophical skepticism undermined the irrational beliefs necessary to the maintenance of a political community and therefore needed to be kept under wraps. As Melzer points out, there is a large body of contemporary scholarship that actively contends that virtually no one other than a few cranks ever wrote esoterically; he performs a great service by, first, showing that the claim is empirically wrong, and second, that it is itself an historically contingent interpretation." (ibid.)
 
2-25-15 2 ~ B Kantinued ;-) R I P ? [!]
(1) a. Who Let the Dogs Out?, b. The Undisclosed Bunker Branch of the Government., c. ...what about the damage to your Presidency?, (d.) The Curve or Nuance Thing, e. Doxology.
(2)~
(3)  The Be All and End All?

Pen~ta-gone? i.e. P5
"This section of the book is wonderfully erudite and leaves no uncertainty that esotericism was indeed a major art that is now all but lost. Melzer points to four reasons for past uses of esotericism. First, it served as protection from prosecution; he notes its widespread use in totalitarian countries like the former Soviet Union and contemporary China. Second, it served to protect the political community from dangerous truths, such as philosophical skepticism about the city’s gods and traditions; third, it served a pedagogical purpose by forcing readers to engage on a deeper level; and fourth, it was used as a transitional strategy for modern writers seeking to undermine dogmatism." (ibid)
P6?  At this Platonic # I will note Aristotle's place in the Nietzschean struggle.  
Hence Fukuyama is a difficult read of Strauss and Plato who are difficult reads.

P7? "If Philosophy Between the Lines were simply a book..." (where P = par.) I might plow on[!]
@9   "Strauss’s central concern was what he called the 'crisis of modernity', where the project of using philosophical reason for practical purposes was in danger of collapse."
@12 "The recovery of the rationalist project was central to Strauss’s life work—"
Having now fully read it, I will let you decide.

Too Random...

...Righty[!]

Knot 2 fraught with fraud'nfreud? 
Freedom the foundation or fountainhead? 
A stopped clock is right... 
too undimention,
1* over infinity has left. 


* poetic license in 3 or 4-D.
won over


**

knot exactly; 1/infinity= zorro?

But seriously to unpun one in particular, freedom over everything is the problem. 
Freedom over everything equals nothing over physics.



12-2-13 (...)added and *reframed

** s/b standard mobius/infinity (Thought I had previously used one, not this one.)

Embedded links:(Not fully read.)
1.  The Difficulty with Hegel
2.  Hegel or Anti-Hegel

Fully Read and Reviewing:
The Hegel Myth and its Method: (Kaufmann 1959)Akin to Plato's Form(The Socratics of the Ideal and States)^
Selections:
"The writings of Hegel and Plato abound in admittedly one-sided statements that are clearly meant to formulate points of view that are then shown to be inadequate and are countered by another perspective. Thus an impressive quilt quotation could be patched together to convince gullible readers that Hegel was — depending on the “scholar’s” plans — either emphatically for or utterly opposed to, say, “equality.” But the understanding of Hegel would be advanced ever so much more by citing one of his remarks about equality in context, showing how it is a step in an argument that is designed to lead the reader to a better comprehension of equality and not to enlist his emotions either for it or against it."

"Hegel was rarely cited in the Nazi literature, and, when he was referred to, it was usually by way of disapproval. (...) Rosenberg also stressed, and excoriated, the “Socratic” elements in Plato."

References to 3D/4M@.  English***, Math, Form~process.
*** generic word language/numbers as an ideal and a language/so-called results.

I do not necessarily want to break out of my understanding of Hegel, not say he would have understood it my way or anyone else's.  But is Popper properly popped?  Yet I do use a method of labelism/reference/progression-digression.  The hazards of the Internet, not to mention old material, one might not recall running into sources before.  I developed my tetrahedron courtesy of my older work on The Republic(1970~), delineating the mass-energy equivalence formula, and possibly Milo Wolff.(2004~)

In the above not yet reads, but glanced at's, they may have a point, and may be missing or pointing from their own point.  I may yet to agree or disagree with them, but still appreciate or depreciate their points. 
^ & ~ must be reviewed.  "Dates~" note time of encounter.

12-3-13 (FP1) Have yet to locate "^". [rtd]

12-4-13 That's the ticket ! ?



But to tilt at swans?

12-9-13 Roughly 13 in rough. 

12-10-13 Scientific American Dispute over Infinity Divides Mathematicians
verses RealClearPolitics Newtonian Government
Trinity Squared ? 

Bookmark

What is the point?
A temp late [!] ( to view later.)
Related charge:
Consciousness
Value of information.

Linguistic turn
Mind outside
???  Not exactly
They say time is the 4th dimension, not that is only one dimention[!]
What about perspective?  Or perpendicular?
My point at this time is that I believe I developed my template of the tetrahedron before running into Arthur Young.  And I am only now in the process of watching his seminar on process theory.i do know I must credit Plato for an earlier model (based on The Republic) which I revamped with the help of Einstein's famous equation and geometry.   (X,Y,Z & P). P for perpendicular and perspective(only now so designated) let alone Plato's ideal or the point.

FOOTNOTES MARCH 2013

3-14-13 : interesting digs Six Links
(b.s.) "S.E.(vi)" A. (fn)FOR D... , B. i.e. S.E. (vi) edgy , C. ROW MAN #Sign [Numeral (i)]. 
(b.s.) "Six Sigma" A. No Frackin' Way (sc) ... E. Rocket Man?[!] ... I. Over Helming. (sc).
un M bed Ed (sc) ?[!] {?}

3-18-13:  Not to leave it, or pun on SNL: nor love it.  R we LOL in the same boat? As for Heading
*: dimentionalism(sic) -
lede : (b.s.)tetra+heed+run - A.,B.,C.,D.,G.,H.,I.
or : (b.s.) lede+or+ship - A., ... . N. Walking the Plank[!] (s.c.)
ship : (b.s.) share+n+angle -
? : (b.s.) tetrahedron of will -
focus : (b.s.) Hume  A. Third Times a Charm. B. He said *a fowl*!
on :  (b.s.) Hume+or+us  / Humorism
Pythagorean : Pythagorean - A Place to Ponder
Socratic :  Socratics. - (b.s.)Kant+Hegel
published today 3-18-13

3-20-13 Curve Balls?  (b.s.)Curve+Balls: A., B., C., D. /  Original Intent and Spin.

3-22-13  Scroll over, and only "Physics" had been read at time of post. Post Physics? / Un Try
Angles? 

3-28-13 Absolut(ist)ly - "clothing" (b.s.)robin+hood: RawMoney Runnin', Genre Clash (sc),  Fair and Balanced... (sc) / divide**: At what point is (pun and rap on justice/scales and founding docs) / "absolutist"(b.s.)absolutism : At what point is , Primary Boogeyman.  / win or lose (b.s.)former(pop+culture): A.(sc), B., C., D., E., F., G., Slash Segue(sc), The Billy Club...(sc), A generous dia-Gnosis.(sc).,  FAUX CULTIAN? (sc), Close Enough for(sc),  Pluto, Plato, and the Pen Dull'em, M(m)., N(n), Pluto, Plato, and the Pen Dull'em, P., Q.(q).  latter (b.s.)boogeyman: Primary Boogeyman, B., C., Bottom Line Update(sc), Juxta-Boogey (sc)
VFW:Virtue Freedom War?  Rhetoric, Logic, Grammar ? [!]

Neo-Perspectivism

It is hard to say which niche this arises from.**
Neo-Nuanced is one trigger.***
Even if retro actively.
No silver bullet.
(Or Lone Ranger)
(I, II, III, IV, Not nor note.)
(Far From It)

Less embedded:
It is not just to Pop Culture but social engineering.
If that is an aphorism, you have one hint.(ouch)
But Freud and Hitler were both Austrian,
but the latter-day Austrians are economic transcendentalists.*
(Emerson, Niche& Rand?)
Some credit may be due to "Plato Not Prozac."

[Just in.]

***

Notes to Asterisk Readers:
It may help the flow if one reads the asterisks in order and after a full read of this piece, but scrolling over links as one goes will be useful.
* no Emerson
** last link inserted: Maybe way too much of a D'Ribble or G'Ribble?
[Apologies for Neo-Euphemism.]

[Breaking News:  Herman Cain will give an "unconventional Endorsement just prior to the South Carolina Primary. (Ctrl F "best" under vent) I hope it is not another one of his tours or projects, but if it is not a third party run or candidate it might be someone from out of the blue if not a write-in.  Huntsman or Bachmann also come to mind.]

***  The irony of taxes, GDP and debt. Is it in the charts?

> Previous Post <

Image of Original In Tent

Re: Sources

C W
Homer, Plato**, Hell'nistic, Hamiltonian/Jeffersonian *: Evolutionary Thinking***.

* less than random link/Google of the day?
not fully read yet,
never completely endorsed, unlike Labelists [Well...not exactly.]

** lede not

[The under lying(pun) under standing(literal) as well as substance, regards semantics. Now that is a pretty firm line for a fluid foundation.
See W(hint pun/ribble)
The history of the constitution falls into this spectrum. The Federalist Papers were an argument, for what does not matter, it won and lost, as the amendments suggest. The constitution was signed but not without compromise. And we were never on the same page again. This is my perspective without the usual qualifiers.]
*** How prophetic?

[Unoriginal In tent: related links without hints]
[On the other hand... looking for spectrum.]

[Given the field of the Republican Presidential race, no apologies are in order. Excuses maybe, blame yourself. BTW: not disappointed by Herman Cain, to drop out but carry the mess age to the table. But in honor of the Federalists, the non-party party, here is a third field or party or option. Caution!]

[NPR: Re-education]
[Update: Herman

How can one make light of a tragedy?

By looking for a silver lining. I think that is what we all want to do. We just have different perspectives on what preemptive is. But remember the silver lining requires a cloud and a light and it is always darkest before the dawn.(Not.)

My original trigger for this thought was a satire on the recent Seahawks loss in Chicago. But please note that my weapon of choice is words and I often have too full a tool box and grab the wrong instrument. But there is a difference between a target and a gun sight and I am sure that they meant surveyors or navigational equipment. Then there is the questionable use of a muzzle.

Back to Seattle: I feel I cost the Seahawks the game by not wearing my cap till the third quarter or so. But then maybe it was in the cards, or the hand of Chicago that was dealt. If these three downs aren't enough then Plato is a hail Mary and there is nothing wrong with the school of hard knocks.

Who let the dogs out? Not Pavlov.

[As for questionable sources: here are some earliest comment.
And more recent.]
[Speaking of rhetorical change*... what about repeal of the Dole-Romney Healthy Deficit Reduction Act, aka Obamacare.]
*see recent link 29:20 and 38:20.

Footnote(Page 2) February 2013

2-4-13 "the birds": Back to "The One Thing?" (sc),  Waiting for [Calm Cast] (sc), DECEMBER 2012 FOOTNOTES (fn) PAGE, Where everyone needs to read... (sc),  In the begining..., Two Birds (sc),  The one thing? (sc), The Pacific? , FOOTNOTES FEBRUARY 2013,  Obtuseness? (sc), Quoth the...[_ _ _ _ _], We Need Ed, Waking up to a New Year., HiTetra! .
Published without comment 2-7-13.


2-11-13 *bracketeds* = pun, [!] or (sic). / / [*] lateM-bed ? ['n-Oh-particular order!]
(sic)= b.s. "ofor"" / / [*]= Plato's Theory of Forms, late= Choice v. Referendum, M= Under the Table?, bed= Health Care Summit (sc), ?= cart B4 horse?

2-12-13 Carpe Diem! SOTU NBC Politics * tetra heed run of sorts?  Photos, images etc.

2-13-13 (FP1):
grand =  (b.s.)"TOW": A.The Be All and End All? (sc){L}, B.A Shot in the Arm?, C.But for Obama.(sc), D. Obama Economy Town Hall (sc) , E.D or R (sc) F.Faux Campaign (sc) ,G.FAUX NEWS! (sc) , H.What the Beck? (sc), I.Betray US Report (sc) , J.October Surpise? "Power Broker Mountain" (period)
{TO BE CONTINUED}(sc) un-hyperlinked need follow-up.
{AND all (b.s.) will not need all their "alphabet"}
picture = (b.s.)"ge+oh+me+try":
how = (b.s.) "trigger+no+metrics":
things = Lincoln on labor prior to capital.

2-19-13 (FP1)... and field theories of matter. (Con temporary: @The Cycle "Beat the Press"!)

2-23-13: Accidents? $tar Buck$
[Bottomline: Do I have John Irving on a shelf(or in a box)?]

2-28-13 You Scroll or Click(sc) normally reserved for (b.s.) [Follow up on, or Goodbye Yellow Brick Road?] i.e. only the by is not a heading. It is the source of the photo. Speaking of by and buy.

Relemma'n Leo

Facebook :  Image



Credit



 

 

 

( Belated Credit Not THE Original Source [?] )

De-Hegelian~Geometrics?
Plato, Hegel, Hume or Wittgenstein
Betrand Russell  /  ? Thank Dog ~I have~ a hard copy[!]

(2-18-15) (F'n P! or ER?) [Neo-jugate or Neo-sophist ? ?  Re:O]
(:~:) Strauss B. Told[!]
 

Pluto, Plato, and the Pen Dull'em

On Competition, Cooperation, and Coordination, in Context.*

* the thread here is not PC, but Progressive Culture or Pop('in) Culture

Rootnote: Conservative Theme?

hmmm?

New Thinking on the Economy
by Dean Baker,
co-Director of the Center for Economic Policy Research (CEPR)

also Beat the Press

[This points to an interesting problem or ROR:
(see labels for explaination)

The government is not getting its money's worth when buying bad assets. Anyone who understands how the economy works and the market works should not wonder. That is how it works. That is the point of buying bad assets, whether one wonders whether it should be done or not. If someone else would buy them the same would apply. The housing bubble* is a similar mechanism within the greater mechanism that is the financial problem.

How the economy works is different than how economics works. The economy is the thing. Economics is an equation. They both need tweaking and can work the way they are designed, but will tweak someone. Unfortunately an equation in economics will work only to the extent that everything (that is needed or wanted) is included in it. The economy works regardless but almost everything is included, except they are tweaking when they do the economics. And speaking of bubbles, they leak.

It might be easier to agree what not to do, than what to do, as long as failure is an option. But failure is not an option; it is a choice. This may seem like lost words, but failure is a potential outcome. And it can no more be simply allowed**, than freedom. Maybe this is Philosophy 701, but the Washington Post is not up to Journalism 201, let alone the economy.]

* housing equals assets except for the financial blowing of the economics.

** meaning failure should be prevented, and freedom promoted(are these not good points to work on?)

[Speaking of link(and equations): the stimulating if not shaky journalism below.(nfry)]

[only glanced at but likely recommended read: and see comments and embedded Krugman. For now: They'll be back.]

[That was Shwartznegger but later Ron Reagan covers similar territory with a guest who earlier slammed the stimulus. That was in December, so it was not the current plan. Which should be called what is: ARARA for Jobs! or just the begining or what is a quick and practical start. But does have a good chart on "Bang for the Buck", which depending on the math(see comments), could make a 1 trillion dollar difference in effectiveness.] [Post comment comment: of course this is as ridiculous a hypothesis as Plato's Republic, but for the sake of dialogue, a totally bipartisan package, could be seen to have potential for zero stimulus, as dollar for dollar is not really a bang.]

LeRoy's Lemma

Cube Root of Plato?**

1. Cube
2. Root [ow]
3. of  ***

[ ! ]  [!]

(~) p.27 $13 ii. *

* 5-26-15

(links inserted footnotes continued) NFRY
"This in fact is true of plane figures in geometry; but some spherical figures exhibit, notwithstanding a complete internal agreement, such a contrast in their external relation, that the one figure cannot possibly be put in the place of the other."

This segment is the tangent to the ying/yang/Jung of TOW.
** links inserted
*** associated/related words added.
Math pun of sorts:  cube root of 27 is 3.
[ OW ] :  Steven Clemons: On Olbermann [difficulties]

 

No Teddy

No Bully* Pulpit.
Disagreement and innovations.

Main Stream Perspectives:
CBS
ABC
PBS
Huffington Post
Salon
Washington Post
YouTube
Boston Globe
"Contensions?"(sic**)
More Follow Up.

[Mean-while up date*** No Rapture.]

* Mika 1 Joe 0 Are you serious, Joe?

** counter intuitive: Bully Pulpit is a good thing, like American Exceptionalism, unlike the link or the namesake.
*** and I did not see the Herman Cain link before my Teddy reference and there is no relation between my pen name LeRoy-Rogers and the therogersinsitute, nor Newt's middle name (Leroy).
[See ** "Are" yes I may be. Apologies for the multi-dimentionalism again, but in regards to Newt and Libertarianism, I think that it could be called Tea Party Nuance, and Ginrich is attempting to be the Obama of the Right(or the No Labels of the Right), while I am somewhere not between Keith Olbermann and Ed Schultz.]
[Profits verses Prophets(Chris Hedges) and more.

[The square of the esoteric.

Strauss on reading In 1952 Strauss published Persecution and the Art of Writing, commonly understood to advance the argument that some philosophers write esoterically in order to avoid persecution by political or religious authorities. A few readers of Strauss suggest esoteric writing may also seek to protect politics from political philosophy -- the explosive reasoning of which might well shatter fragile opinions undergirding the political order. Stemming from his study of Maimonides and Al Farabi, and then extended to his reading of Plato (he mentions particularly the discussion of writing in the Phaedrus), Strauss proposed that an esoteric text was the proper type for philosophic learning. Rather than simply outlining the philosopher's thoughts, the esoteric text forces readers to do their own thinking and learning. As Socrates says in the Phaedrus, writing does not respond when questioned, but invites a dialogue with the reader, thereby reducing the problems of the written word. One political danger Strauss pointed to was the acceptance of dangerous ideas too quickly by students. This was perhaps also relevant in the trial of Socrates, where his relationship with Alcibiades was used against him.

Ultimately, Strauss believed that philosophers offered both an "exoteric" or salutary teaching and an "esoteric" or true teaching, which was concealed from the general reader. For maintaining this distinction, Strauss is often accused of having written esoterically himself. Moreover he also emphasized that writers often left contradictions and other excuses to encourage the more careful examination of the writing. Leo Strauss's favourite novelist was Jane Austen.[5]

This spin off is from actually reading the previous bold "and more" but is relevant to the Gingrich "Exceptionalism" and Obama practical and incremental. And Platonic Dialogue.(sic)]
[Spell Check Gingrich: left Ginrich for link & search purposes: but note Strauss to Chomsky philosophical dynamism(Wittgenstein) via esoteric Tea Party Gingrich attempt at nuance.]