Leo Strauss was not just an ordinary philosopher or political thinker; his influence spanned continents and still generates discussion long after he died in 1973. So, who exactly was Leo Strauss? By delving into his time at the University of Chicago, how he approached classic texts controversially, and the lasting impact of his teachings, one can begin to grasp both the brilliance and significance of this man.
Early Life and Education
Leo Strauss was born in 1899 in Kirchhain, Germany. He came from a family of Orthodox Jews, which greatly impacted his thinking and the questions he had asked throughout his life. Growing up at a time when society was rapidly changing socially and politically also made him interested in ideas.
Strauss went to university in Marburg, where he studied philosophy very intensively. Two philosophers who taught there had a particularly important influence on him: Edmund Husserl, who started a school of thought called phenomenology, and Martin Heidegger, whose existentialist ideas became very famous.
Both men helped Strauss think more deeply about what it means for something to be true (the nature of truth itself) and questions like “What does it mean to exist?” or “How does being human differ from being any other type of thing?”
Strauss’s life took a dramatic shift when the Nazi party came to power in Germany. Escaping worsening antisemitic persecution in 1937, he emigrated to the US, where he could both seek sanctuary and work freely as an academic.
Strauss found a second intellectual home in the United States, where he held positions at institutions such as the University of Chicago and the New School for Social Research. His movement saved his life and enabled him to thrive philosophically, having an enduring impact on modern political thought.
Intellectual Influences
A wide range of philosophical traditions influenced Leo Strauss’s thinking. Classical Greek thinkers like Plato and Aristotle were at the heart of his philosophy. He admired how they examined essential human questions through their work on politics and life itself.
Strauss also took inspiration from Plato’s dialogues, which can be read in many different ways and often have several meanings at once. This led him to believe ancient texts still had lots to say to us today. From Aristotle, Strauss learned to study political philosophy in a systematic fashion: analyzing how political systems work in practice (not just thinking about how they should operate).
Strauss was influenced by medieval Jewish and Islamic thought, specifically the works of Maimonides and Al-Farabi. He admired how these philosophers merged Greek philosophy with religious ideas—a tactic he also found compelling.
Strauss both engaged with and critiqued post-Enlightenment political philosophy. He objected to relativism and historicism in thinkers such as Hobbes and Machiavelli. He believed that breaking from classical and medieval thinking created a crisis for political philosophy that could only be addressed by revisiting ancient questions—something he saw as timeless truths.
Major Works and Contributions
Some of Strauss’ writings are particularly notable because they contain deep thoughts and present perspectives that may be difficult to accept. Perhaps chief among these is Natural Rights and History, which can be considered one of the foundations of his thinking.
In this book, Strauss explores what happens when we try to live according to two very different beliefs at the same time: ancient laws so basic they apply to everyone everywhere (natural right) and relativism from history class, where we learn that what’s right or fair changes over time.
Strauss suggests that any society abandoning natural rights principles will become more corrupt and collapse. Today, it’s still important for people to consider timeless moral truths when making decisions about politics or their personal lives.
In Persecution and the Art of Writing, Strauss explores esoteric writing – the idea that philosophers often disguise their true thoughts to avoid persecution. He suggests that careful reading can reveal hidden meanings intended for a selected audience. In addition to introducing this new way of approaching philosophical texts, he shows how precarious life could be for thinkers living under oppressive regimes.
Strauss’s other important books also help confirm his reputation. In The City and Man, he reflects deeply on classical political philosophy by examining works by Plato, Aristotle, and Thucydides, highlighting enduring political questions.
On Tyranny, meanwhile, takes as its starting point Xenophon’s dialogue Hiero to investigate what tyranny really means and whether there is an inherent contradiction between wielding power and being moral.
Key Philosophical Ideas
Leo Strauss’s main philosophical ideas revolve around a small number of central themes that both challenge current thinking and call for a return to basic ideas that may have been forgotten.
One central point he makes, for example, is a critique of something called “historicism.” This is important because Strauss believes historicism leads people to believe in moral and intellectual relativism.
If everything must be understood in terms of the time and place it happened, then how can we say anything is really right or wrong, true or false?
If all truths are historically contingent—meaning there are no truths everyone would accept at all times—it seems like there can’t be any objective principles everyone should agree on. To Strauss, denying permanent philosophical truths leaves us without clarity about what we should do (moral clarity).
Moreover, Strauss underscored the criticality of religion in politics. He considered it crucial for holding society together and providing moral direction. The philosopher believed one could not rely solely on reason to maintain political life. It necessitated the kind of ethical framework and communal solidarity that religion supplies.
While philosophy aims at truth, Strauss argued, religion gives communities shared myths and symbols—things he believed they needed to function well. Thus, Strauss held that reason and revelation are necessary for a sound political system: they must work together.
Influence and Legacy
Leo Strauss’s legacy and influence are profound. He shaped intellectual debate and political movements. His philosophy, known as Straussianism, involves scrutinizing classical texts closely and grappling with enduring questions in political philosophy.
Straussians argue that returning to the works of thinkers such as Plato and Aristotle makes it possible to discover truths about human nature and politics that apply at all times—not just truths about those ancient thinkers’ own eras. This approach is seen as providing a corrective to relativism about morals or knowledge within modern thought.
Strauss’s ideas have significantly impacted American conservatism. Conservative thinkers concerned with defending traditional values were attracted to his “attack” on relativism and his belief in principles applying universally. The Prominent politicians and intellectuals that Strauss influenced include Irving Kristol and Allan Bloom, who shaped important policy debates.
Strauss had a big impact on academia. His followers started their own academic programs and schools of thought, ensuring that both Chicago and Claremont McKenna had centers for Straussian research. Important disciples like Harvey Mansfield and Thomas Pangle absorbed Strauss’s teachings so deeply that today, there are energetic communities of scholars exploring the intersection of philosophy, politics, and history.
Controversies and Criticisms
Leo Strauss’s philosophy is not without its critics. One major criticism is that his ideas promote elitism. It has been argued that Strauss believed only certain individuals could understand what philosophers meant when writing about certain subjects – such as politics or ethics.
This idea, known as esotericism (meaning writing in a way where you hide your true thoughts from most readers), has led some people to say Strauss thought there should be an elite group who hold political truths but don’t tell everyone else.
There has also been controversy around the political uses of Strauss’s work. Some say it can be misread (intentionally or not) as supporting anti-democratic policies because he criticizes modernity and looks back on ancient philosophy so much.
Take, for instance, the connection between hidden meanings and cryptic writing with the concept known as a “noble lie,” an untruth that rulers believe serves the common good. Critics say it has justified government deception and authoritarianism without public accountability.
In universities, there is still debate over how Strauss reads old books and what he finds in them. Do his techniques for examining texts closely make sense? Do claims about what ancient thinkers were really up to have any credibility?
While some admire the clarity and strength of Strauss’s analyses, considering them models of their kind, others think he often goes too far when reconstructing lost arguments from available clues or else misunderstands entirely those he deems esoteric.
The sharp disagreements among scholars about these questions demonstrate more broadly the unsettled nature of Strauss’s legacy. People continue grappling with individual difficulties and broader implications for political thought and intellectual history.
So, Who Was Leo Strauss?
Leo Strauss was a prominent political thinker who believed in examining classical texts to find truths about human nature and politics that are relevant for all time. Born in Germany in 1899 and later moving to the United States, Strauss criticized the idea of relative truth in modern times and instead argued for the existence of moral principles that do not change.
In his theory of esoteric writing, Strauss suggested that there are hidden messages in the works of philosophy that a select few can best understand; most people might miss them altogether.
Strauss had an impact on American conservatism, although today, thinkers on both the left and right claim him as an influence. Thirty years after his death, there is still intense interest among academics in his work—so much so that we could almost speak of a Straussian school or even a cult.
