What do you think?
Rate this book
The City and Man
The City and Man consists of provocative essays by the late Leo Strauss on Aristotle's Politics , Plato's Republic , and Thucydides' Peloponnesian Wars . Together, the essays constitute a brilliant attempt to use classical political philosophy as a means of liberating modern political philosophy from the stranglehold of ideology. The essays are based on a long and intimate familiarity with the works, but the essay on Aristotle is especially important as one of Strauss's few writings on the philosopher who largely shaped Strauss's conception of antiquity. The essay on Plato is a full-scale discussion of Platonic political philosophy, wide in scope yet compact in execution. When discussing Thucydides, Strauss succeeds not only in presenting the historian as a moral thinker of high rank, but in drawing his thought into the orbit of philosophy, and thus indicating a relation of history and philosophy that does not presuppose the absorption of philosophy by history.
254 pages, Paperback
First published November 1, 1964
About the author
Leo Strauss
149 books312 followersLeo Strauss was a German-American philosopher and philologist of ancient Greek text. In his early years studying in Germany he acquainted himself with seminal German thinkers of the 20th century such as Martin Heidegger, Edmund Husserl and Ernst Cassirer. As a person of Jewish ancestry, Strauss fled to the United States during the rule of Third Reich and taught at the University of Chicago. There, he wrote commentaries on ancient Greek thought of Plato and Aristotle, as well as the medieval philosophy of Maimonides and Islamic philosophers, and expounded his thought on political philosophy. His legacy remains in the realm of political theories to this day.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 25 of 25 reviews
September 23, 2009
Wow. All I can say is “wow, what a read.” For an author that seemingly dislikes the use of paragraphs, Strauss’ books are in the small minority of dense reads that I find worth the time to struggle through. He is/was an extremely intelligent man who, fun for us, or maybe just fun for me, writes in code; Strauss’ works are, as he may say, a “silent instruction.” The City and Man is certainly no exception to this rule.
Don’t like philosophical spoilers? Then stop reading this review because the following are, in my view, a few code breakers for interpreting this Straussian text. I’ll keep it somewhat laconically brief.
Nomos: Nomos is conventional, relative truth; a fabricated, normative reality. Even when not explicitly using this word (i.e. the picture in a frame) Strauss is always talking about nomos within his tacit instruction (i.e. the frame around the picture). Through mental constructs, our perception is overlaid with the markings of cultural values, beliefs, ideals, nationalities, habits, lines of thinking, and ways of proceeding. Perception is distorted in accordance with conditioning. First there is a cognition, then a cognitive distortion. The ‘city’ overwhelms ‘nature’. Personally, my ears perk up whenever someone uses the phrase “the real world.”
Nature: Awareness. Simple as that. Awareness precedes thought and hence can’t be captured by the modality of thought and other mental phenomena. Before the advent of the city, our natural state (awareness) lies free of values and judgments -On a side note the contemplative practice of meditation may assist us in experientially seeing this. Moreover nature is the ‘whole’, the whole phenomenal world that is. Reminiscent of eastern and Gnostic philosophies, we are the world and the world is us. We lie in ourselves and fail to realize it because we alienate ourselves from ourselves (consciousness becomes fragmented within itself through abstract categories and interpretive schemas).
Politics: The interaction between people. But as far as rhetoric is concerned it is the manipulation of nomos for specific consequences. By fashioning mental artifacts that shape and organize experience into specified constellations, philosophers persuade the masses through their mouthpieces that are the politicians. However, those that have broken free from this mental-social immersion (Plato’s Cave) are no longer influenced by these political games and are thus free to participate in the further propagation of myths, stand aloof, or divulge this information in the attempt to liberate others. To be just or unjust is the question...or maybe this is a false, dualistic dilemma. After all the entire normative landscape, by being grounded in fiction, is specious to begin with.
Random Bits and Pieces: Every now and then Strauss throws in a random chunky paragraph or ‘misplaced’ sentence that provides contextual clues. Duly note these clues because their counterparts will most likely appear, indirectly of course, ten or twenty pages down the road. Given these hints we must rotate the text and unlock their true meaning much like a Rubik's Cube. Although I won’t quote specific passages I do, however, remember that certain intimations are made: That enlightenment itself is not a myth, that those who Know Themselves are truly wise, and towards the end Strauss even ends with the question Quid Sit Deus (What is God?). In other words, what is the phenomenal world? From whence do phenomena emerge and fall away to? What, really, is our true nature? That is, more specifically, who am I, really, once all the constructions that I surround myself with have been stripped away?
The eye will never see itself.
Don’t like philosophical spoilers? Then stop reading this review because the following are, in my view, a few code breakers for interpreting this Straussian text. I’ll keep it somewhat laconically brief.
Nomos: Nomos is conventional, relative truth; a fabricated, normative reality. Even when not explicitly using this word (i.e. the picture in a frame) Strauss is always talking about nomos within his tacit instruction (i.e. the frame around the picture). Through mental constructs, our perception is overlaid with the markings of cultural values, beliefs, ideals, nationalities, habits, lines of thinking, and ways of proceeding. Perception is distorted in accordance with conditioning. First there is a cognition, then a cognitive distortion. The ‘city’ overwhelms ‘nature’. Personally, my ears perk up whenever someone uses the phrase “the real world.”
Nature: Awareness. Simple as that. Awareness precedes thought and hence can’t be captured by the modality of thought and other mental phenomena. Before the advent of the city, our natural state (awareness) lies free of values and judgments -On a side note the contemplative practice of meditation may assist us in experientially seeing this. Moreover nature is the ‘whole’, the whole phenomenal world that is. Reminiscent of eastern and Gnostic philosophies, we are the world and the world is us. We lie in ourselves and fail to realize it because we alienate ourselves from ourselves (consciousness becomes fragmented within itself through abstract categories and interpretive schemas).
Politics: The interaction between people. But as far as rhetoric is concerned it is the manipulation of nomos for specific consequences. By fashioning mental artifacts that shape and organize experience into specified constellations, philosophers persuade the masses through their mouthpieces that are the politicians. However, those that have broken free from this mental-social immersion (Plato’s Cave) are no longer influenced by these political games and are thus free to participate in the further propagation of myths, stand aloof, or divulge this information in the attempt to liberate others. To be just or unjust is the question...or maybe this is a false, dualistic dilemma. After all the entire normative landscape, by being grounded in fiction, is specious to begin with.
Random Bits and Pieces: Every now and then Strauss throws in a random chunky paragraph or ‘misplaced’ sentence that provides contextual clues. Duly note these clues because their counterparts will most likely appear, indirectly of course, ten or twenty pages down the road. Given these hints we must rotate the text and unlock their true meaning much like a Rubik's Cube. Although I won’t quote specific passages I do, however, remember that certain intimations are made: That enlightenment itself is not a myth, that those who Know Themselves are truly wise, and towards the end Strauss even ends with the question Quid Sit Deus (What is God?). In other words, what is the phenomenal world? From whence do phenomena emerge and fall away to? What, really, is our true nature? That is, more specifically, who am I, really, once all the constructions that I surround myself with have been stripped away?
The eye will never see itself.
January 6, 2022
Strauss sets out to make sense of the overarching position of political philosophy in the west, as it stands simultaneously in indeterminate confusion and yet victory over the world, by looking back to its earliest developments in Ancient Greece. While the most space is given to the Straussian recapitulation of Plato (Plato as teaching through false arguments and esoteric symbology, The Republic as a false account meant to show the limits of the political and the impossibility of philosophic influence on politics) and Thucydides (Thucydides as both pragmatically objective and journalistically critical of Athens, his history both political and universal), Strauss' real contribution to the discussion of the present in the introduction lays with the shorter chapter on Aristotle: While both Plato and Thucydides are shown to be skeptical of the naturalization of politics, and subsequently of the durability of any political idealism, Aristotle 'Politics' attempts to produce a politics derived as much as possible from Nature and scientific deductions, leading to such things as Natural Slaves and the outlawing of Democracy. Strauss feels that this uneasy linking of the natural with the conventional, of knowledge with opinion, paves the way for future western philosophy to over-valuate its own security and subsequently become mere political opinionization, ie blind ideology, without regard to essence, substance or foundation. Indeed, with the constructivism of Locke and Rosseau (and Rawls to follow), once we mistake our mores for a natural foundation, we even become confident enough to disregard peripatetic reductionism for a blind trust in 'superior' human idealism, so Struass maintains ... Well known for his supposed 'esotericism', Strauss' readings of Plato and Thucydides that follow, with their essentially cynical and agoraphobic (ha!) natures, are given tacitly as a solution and yet one that seems by definition impossible to implement ... an interesting book to be sure, and a great capitulation of the Straussian method of interpretation.
August 25, 2011
Good essays on Thucydides and on Aristotle. Strauss offers up some rather subtle points about the ideal of the polis and about Thucydides' vision of human fate and human frailty. Not so taken with the essay on Plato, but the book is worth reading when thinking the origin of the idea of what we call politics...
June 26, 2020
Leo Strauss is one of the most subtly brilliant thinkers of the 20th Century. He has spawned a considerable reputation in Western Philosophy, particularly as the creator of a neoconservative movement that some critics label, "Straussianism."
Actual students of Strauss would testify that no such school exists, because it is actually, if you can make an -ism of him, anti-Straussian to moor individuals under his tutelage or peer-ship into a school of his own thought. Leo Strauss was no conservative - he was an incredibly objective and human thinker who tried to probe deeply ancient philosophies to demonstrate their relevance to modern times. And what modernity can learn from them.
This book ranks just as brilliant as any other I have read of Leo Strauss's. While I have only read deeply the essays on Aristotle's 'Politics' and Plato's 'Republic, they are rich with ideas and possibilities not only for how to interpret the texts themselves, but also philosophy and life itself more broadly. His analysis of Aristotle is especially deep in maneuvering the intricacies of his thought, imbuing new views and life into Aristotelian politics, the Good Life, and what telos communities hope to share. He contrasts and combines Aristotle with thinkers ancient and modern. He has a dextrous mind.
Strauss's theory of "esoteric reading" is also showcased here, with him stating that Plato hid his meaning within many layers of his dialogues in order to speak to chosen few, while making a general message for the general reader. His insights into Plato are such as never get airtime today. They could seem conspiratorial to some, but I think Strauss truly was trying to arrive objectively at what an Ancient Greek philosopher may have meant in his own cultural moment. Strauss is trying to present these thinkers within their true context and meaning, and not the bastardization of that meaning that the centuries have subjected them to. His task is an especially difficult one, and I admire individuals such as Strauss who try to empathize so totally with another moment apart from theirs, and then make it digestible to the readers of today.
That is likely his paramount achievement and brilliance.
Actual students of Strauss would testify that no such school exists, because it is actually, if you can make an -ism of him, anti-Straussian to moor individuals under his tutelage or peer-ship into a school of his own thought. Leo Strauss was no conservative - he was an incredibly objective and human thinker who tried to probe deeply ancient philosophies to demonstrate their relevance to modern times. And what modernity can learn from them.
This book ranks just as brilliant as any other I have read of Leo Strauss's. While I have only read deeply the essays on Aristotle's 'Politics' and Plato's 'Republic, they are rich with ideas and possibilities not only for how to interpret the texts themselves, but also philosophy and life itself more broadly. His analysis of Aristotle is especially deep in maneuvering the intricacies of his thought, imbuing new views and life into Aristotelian politics, the Good Life, and what telos communities hope to share. He contrasts and combines Aristotle with thinkers ancient and modern. He has a dextrous mind.
Strauss's theory of "esoteric reading" is also showcased here, with him stating that Plato hid his meaning within many layers of his dialogues in order to speak to chosen few, while making a general message for the general reader. His insights into Plato are such as never get airtime today. They could seem conspiratorial to some, but I think Strauss truly was trying to arrive objectively at what an Ancient Greek philosopher may have meant in his own cultural moment. Strauss is trying to present these thinkers within their true context and meaning, and not the bastardization of that meaning that the centuries have subjected them to. His task is an especially difficult one, and I admire individuals such as Strauss who try to empathize so totally with another moment apart from theirs, and then make it digestible to the readers of today.
That is likely his paramount achievement and brilliance.
April 1, 2020
A congregant who was a retired political science professor died last year and because he and I had engaged in various philosophical discussions over the years, I was able to select some books from his library. He was a student of Strauss, so there were a handful of Strauss' books to choose from.
This volume is made up of three long essays--one on Aristotle's Politics, one on Plato's Republic, and one on Thucydides' Peloponnesian War. In each essay there are some interesting insights, but overall I found Strauss to be a most infelicitous writer. The final essay was by far the best and the most interesting, making me want to read Thucydides in full (I've only ever read excerpts).
An overarching theme seems to be doing what is practical and realistic in politics.
This volume is made up of three long essays--one on Aristotle's Politics, one on Plato's Republic, and one on Thucydides' Peloponnesian War. In each essay there are some interesting insights, but overall I found Strauss to be a most infelicitous writer. The final essay was by far the best and the most interesting, making me want to read Thucydides in full (I've only ever read excerpts).
An overarching theme seems to be doing what is practical and realistic in politics.
March 3, 2012
It's like Faulkner decided to write a book on political philosophy. There are a couple of themes that keep popping up across the three essays, but not enough to provide a coherent point to the book. Each essay on ancient Greek books (Aristotle's Politics, Plato's Republic, and Thucydides' History of the Peloponnesian War) is worth reading for the insightful comments on each particular book, but even they wander all over the place.
I couldn't sum this book up if I wanted to. It may be a flaw in me, but I like a solid argument that's pretty well defined.
I couldn't sum this book up if I wanted to. It may be a flaw in me, but I like a solid argument that's pretty well defined.
January 10, 2022
Not my preferred style of writing, too roundabout.
However, has some good analysis and viewpoints.
However, has some good analysis and viewpoints.
April 28, 2019
Wish I'd read the texts he was analyzing more recently, but nonetheless found this a fascinating and compelling read. The biggest thing he does a good job of is bringing out the stakes of these texts, and presenting the fundamental tensions they are pre-occupied with. I need to read more competing interpretations because his seem so convincing and incontrovertible in the flow of reading them. Also need to read something he actually wrote rather than just lecture transcriptions to see how it differs stylistically. I found this style at times hard to follow but also rhetorically powerful in a hard to identify manner.
November 22, 2023
"And when I'm back in Chicago, I feel it
Another version of me, I was in it
I wave goodbye to the end of beginning
...
You take the man out of the city, not the city out the man (x3)" - Joe "Djo" Keery in “End of Beginning”
Another version of me, I was in it
I wave goodbye to the end of beginning
...
You take the man out of the city, not the city out the man (x3)" - Joe "Djo" Keery in “End of Beginning”
March 22, 2022
Amazing work. Required reading for anyone interested in Aristotle's Politics, Plato's Republic, and Thucydides. Unsurpassed interpretations of these three texts. Too many insights to list.
February 3, 2024
I reread The Republic, Politics, and The Peloponnesian War so I could reread this book. But I am still ignorant. I enjoy it, though.
February 5, 2023
One of the best books I've read. I believe it will always remain a classic. Though it could be very dense, it is philosophically and mentally liberating.
March 28, 2023
"The City and Man" is a book by the German-American philosopher Leo Strauss, first published in 1964. The book is a collection of essays that explore the theme of political philosophy, focusing on the relationship between the city and man.
Strauss argues that political philosophy is concerned with the nature of political life and the principles that govern it. He examines different approaches to political philosophy throughout history, including those of Plato, Aristotle, and Machiavelli.
In particular, Strauss emphasizes the importance of understanding the nature of political society and the role that it plays in shaping human life. He argues that the city, or political society, is the central focus of political philosophy, and that the nature of the city determines the nature of man.
Strauss contrasts two different views of the city: the classical view, which emphasizes the importance of the common good and the virtues of citizenship, and the modern view, which emphasizes individual freedom and autonomy. He argues that the modern view has led to a crisis of legitimacy in politics, as it has eroded the sense of common purpose and moral values that underpin political society.
Overall, "The City and Man" is a significant work of political philosophy that explores the relationship between the individual and society, the nature of political authority, and the principles that govern political life. Strauss's insights into these issues have been highly influential in shaping contemporary debates in political philosophy.
GPT
Strauss argues that political philosophy is concerned with the nature of political life and the principles that govern it. He examines different approaches to political philosophy throughout history, including those of Plato, Aristotle, and Machiavelli.
In particular, Strauss emphasizes the importance of understanding the nature of political society and the role that it plays in shaping human life. He argues that the city, or political society, is the central focus of political philosophy, and that the nature of the city determines the nature of man.
Strauss contrasts two different views of the city: the classical view, which emphasizes the importance of the common good and the virtues of citizenship, and the modern view, which emphasizes individual freedom and autonomy. He argues that the modern view has led to a crisis of legitimacy in politics, as it has eroded the sense of common purpose and moral values that underpin political society.
Overall, "The City and Man" is a significant work of political philosophy that explores the relationship between the individual and society, the nature of political authority, and the principles that govern political life. Strauss's insights into these issues have been highly influential in shaping contemporary debates in political philosophy.
GPT
May 31, 2022
There's some really good stuff here. The Essay on The Republic made the most sense because that was the only one I have read fully, but of the others I had some cursory knowledge. I read the Aristotle part a while ago so I have sort of forgotten exactly what it was about, but I do remember it being interesting, and it made me want to read Aristotle more. The Republic essay was great because it really refreshed me on all of the stuff I had learned in the class I took with it. The essay on Thucydides was, although probably not the most interesting, one of the more provocative one for me. Usually you imagine Thucydides as some political realist, but Strauss argues that his connection to philosophy and the same problems which the other Ancients tackled is closer than meets the eye.
December 12, 2010
This book, which is based on a set of lectures given by the author at the University of Virginia in 1962, represents a solid overview of some of the political works of Plato, Aristotle, and Thucydides. It is unique in that it the author's exposure to the phenomenologists Edmund Husserl and Martin Heidegger rubs off on the text. My favorite part, a cogent discussion of the City-Soul analogy in Plato's Republic, begins on page 91.
August 1, 2013
At first blush the pairing of an essay on Thucydides' Peloponnesian War with ones on Aristotle's Politics and Plato's Republic might seem a bit odd, but it's both brilliant and quite purposeful. Each essay is excellent on its own, while the combination allows Strauss to present perspectives on classical political thought that wouldn't be possible if he limited the subjects strictly to political philosophy. There's a lot of food for thought in these dense 240 pages.
August 19, 2012
A grand analysis of Plato's Republic, Aristotle's Politics, and Thucydides's Histories. Noteworthy is his contention that Plato wasn't reactionary, but instead viewed democracy as the best regime for philosophers to live in.
July 13, 2015
The question of the conflict between the justice of money making and justice of medicine as Strauss puts it is to me the most important and urgent moral question of one's living in this secular world. I expect to think about this question deeper and find more books to read.
May 29, 2007
Great reading of the Republic.
Want to read
November 12, 2009Recommended by James Schall in Another Sort of Learning, Intro to Part 2, as one of Four Beginning, Though Difficult, Books by Leo Strauss and Eric Voegelin.
March 10, 2013
As with many of Strauss's writings, "The City and Man" offers a little bit of commentary on the ancients with a lot of Strauss's own ideas tucked in.
January 9, 2023
Not a quick read, but not Aristotle or Kant either. Well worth the effort for inducing that ol' friend *thought*.
April 6, 2018
A brilliant and highly imaginative reading, "looking for and aft'", of these classical authors.
May 1, 2018
I wish I could write/express myself this well...
The way he writes about Thucydides, makes you appreciate his style even more. Reading Peloponnesian War after this would be a treat!
The way he writes about Thucydides, makes you appreciate his style even more. Reading Peloponnesian War after this would be a treat!
Displaying 1 - 25 of 25 reviews