Joshua Parens

Maimonides's Guide of the Perplexed (pub. 1204 CE) is among the most important and elusive works in the history of Judaism. Among the greatest difficulties has been determining what genre of writing it belongs to. Leo Strauss challenged the contemporary consensus that it is a work of "Jewish philosophy." Rather, the Guide Is first and foremost a defense of the Law, or what his predecessor, whom he praised highly, Alfarabi identified as the art of kalam or dialectical theology. However, It is an unusual sort of kalam, which Strauss dubbed "intelligent kalam." Since Shlomo Pines's 1979 article on the limits of knowledge in Maimonides (as well as Alfarabi and Ibn Bajja), much of Maimonides scholarship has centered on these limits. In his book on the Guide published in 2013, Josef Stern identified two extremes on the limits of knowledge, the dogmatic and the skeptical. He expanded on Pines's skeptical reading. We provide a middle ground between these two extremes. We argue that the limits are intentionally vague, making possible thereby not only a defense of the Law but also a defense of philosophy. The second part concerns the three great themes of the Guide: creation, prophecy, and providence. Maimonides's preferred position on prophecy is that God can will to prevent it. It is unlikely to be coincidental that obstacles, impediments, prevention are also crucial in his accounts of creation and providence. We show that obstacles or privation are a key to these themes and the Guide as a whole"-- Provided by publisher.

In the summer of 2016, the University of Dallas and the Instituto Tecnológico Autónomo de México organized a conference to discuss the topic of the middle class and its continued decline—recognizing that, despite some historical, political and cultural differences, healthy democracies throughout the hemisphere depend upon a strong and prosperous middle class. This volume brings together contributions by nine scholars from both institutions. The chapters reflect diverse disciplinary perspectives that are historical, political, economic, anthropological, and philosophical. Despite this diversity, the volume possesses a conceptual unity that stems from its foundation in Aristotle’s approach to the middle class. On this basis, the topic is given a rigorous study that is both theoretical and data-driven. The chapters include treatments of Aristotle, Montesquieu, Adam Smith and Sir James Steuart, Catholic social teaching, the problem of inequality in the US, the definition and measurement of the middle class in Mexico, as well as its values and political attitudes, the rise of middle-class politics in early-twentieth-century Latin America, and a comparative analysis of healthcare for the middle class in North America.

Leo Strauss is known primarily for reviving classical political philosophy. Strauss recovered that great tradition of thought largely lost to the West by beginning his study of classical thought with its teaching on politics rather than its metaphysics. What brought Strauss to this way of reading the classics, however, was a discovery he made as a young political scientist studying the obscure texts of Islamic and Jewish medieval political thought. In this volume, Joshua Parens examines Strauss's investigations of medieval political philosophy, offering interpretations of his writings on the great thinkers of that tradition, including interpretations of his most difficult writings on Alfarabi and Maimonides. In addition Parens explicates Strauss's statements on Christian medieval thought and his argument for rejecting the Scholastic paradigm as a method for interpreting Islamic and Jewish thought. Contrasting Scholasticism with Islamic and Jewish medieval political philosophy, Parens clarifies the theme of Strauss's thought, what Strauss calls the "theologico-political problem," and reveals the significance of medieval political philosophy in the Western tradition.

Based on the ostensible fact that truly Socratic dialogue entails a considerable inequality between participants, Parens explores Socrates’s reasons for conversing dialectically with those who are manifestly his philosophic inferiors. Contrary to many Plato scholars who emphasize Socrates’s self-reported ignorance and, hence, the “Sisyphean” character of his philosophic activity, Parens intends to show—with the help of Maimonides—that Socrates is an “overflowing” philosopher, who cannot help but share his wisdom with others.

A whirl surrounds Maimonides’ Guide of the Perplexed 1.2. He seems to argue, there, that good and evil are merely concerns of the imagination. In the prophetology, Guide 2.32–48, Maimonides never refers to practical intellect or prudence. Recent interpreters have inferred that the imagination takes the place of practical intellect in Maimonides’ practical teaching. This paper seeks to show that, in keeping with earlier works such as Eight Chapters, Maimonides continues to rely on practical intellect throughout the Guide as an integral part of his teaching on true prophecy and the best regime ruled by divine law.

Most recent interpreters of Maimonides argue that his ethical views develop from support of the mean in Eight Chapters to support of asceticism in "Laws Concerning Character Traits" and the Guide. This article challenges that interpretation: first, through a reconsideration of Aristotle's views on the mean and the relation of the ethically virtuous life to the contemplative life, and, second, through a reconsideration of Maimonides' texts. One riddle recommends we not jump to conclusions about Maimonides' views: In Eight Chapters he appears to advocate the mean, on the basis of Aristotelian sources. In the Guide he ascribes his most ascetic recommendations to Aristotle.