I’ve been outlining a potential Youtube series on explaining The One Law of Mind and came across this perspective. For some, this may contrast too much with former representations of E.G. However, what would-be the pursuit of life in a “religious” and formal sense?
“It would seem that each culture must be understood in the light of what it looks up to; that to which it looks up may appear to it to become reflected in a particular kind of human being, and that kind of human being may rule the society in question in broad daylight; it is this special case of rule which Aristotle regarded as the normal case.”
The City and Man. Paperback ed. University of Chicago Press 1978, p.34.
Nietzsche’s Will to Power is his interpretation of the Copernican Revolution in Philosophy of the Kantian thing-in-itself, constrained to a, non-Platonic, poetic form due to the limitation of an adequate language to express a system.
Strauss’ Natural Right is “that particular interpretation of natural right” which can be “wholeheartedly” acted upon, Philosophy and Religion: Nietzsche’s representation of Will to Power in Beyond Good and Evil.
One particular interpretation of Peirce’s Semeiotics mediates Strauss description of the fundamental dilemma of our time and concludes with the acquisition of a Dynamic Interpretant by means of a teleological standard, the Final Interpretant.
