No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 August 2009
In his Farewell Address, George Washington said: “'Tis substantially true, that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule indeed extends with more or less force to every species of free Government. Who that is a sincere friend to it, can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric? Promote then as an object of primary importance, Institutions for the general diffusion of knowledge. In proportion as the structure of government gives force to public opinion, it is essential that public opinion should be enlightened.” With these words in mind, I sought to examine West German institutions for the general diffusion of knowledge, specifically the schools. I tried to find out whether those institutions promote, or even speak of, virtue or morality, and whether they aim at the development of enlightened public opinion. I defined enlightened public opinion as those opinions which support free, popular government. Enlightened human beings are those “who recognize other human beings for what they are, namely, persons with rights which they must respect, in order to have their own rights recognized and respected.”
1 Jaffe, Harry V., The Conditions of Freedom (London, 1975), p. 155.Google Scholar
2 See Nigsch, Otto, Bildungsreform zwischen Entfremdung und Emanzipation (Köln, 1978)Google Scholar; Sontheimer, Kurt, Das Elend unserer Intellektuellen. Linke Theorie in der Bundesrepublik (Hamburg, 1976)Google Scholar; Brezinka, Wolfgang, Erziehung und Kulturrevolution. Die Pädagogik der Neuen Linken (München, 1976)Google Scholar; von Hentig, Hartmut, Systemzwang und Selbstbestimmung (Stuttgart, 1974)Google Scholar; Rohrmoser, Günter, Zeitzeichen: Bilanz einer Ära (Stuttgart, 1977)Google Scholar; and Schoeck, Helmut, Schülermanipulation (Freiburg, 1976)Google Scholar; Günther, Henning and Clemens, and Willeke, Rudolf, Die Gewalt der Verneinung. Die Kritische Theorie und ihre Folgen (Stuttgart, 1978)Google Scholar; Ülshofer, Robert, ed., Marxismus im Deutsch-unterricht (Köln, 1978)Google Scholar; and Christoph, and Rülcker, Tobias, Soziale Normen und Schulische Erziehung (Heidelberg, 1978).Google Scholar
3 Ülshofer, , Marxismus, p. 7.Google Scholar
4 Ibid., p. 9. Otto Nigsch also sees a polarization in West German education. He states that those West German educators who want to eliminate the present form of West German society seek to do so by supporting emancipatory education. Nigsch, , Bildungsreform, p. 10Google Scholar. See also Roth, Hans-Georg, 25 Jahre Bildungsreform in der Bundesrepublik (Bad Heilbrunn, 1975), p. 9.Google Scholar
5 Frister, Erich, Schicksal Hauptschule (Frankfurt, 1976), pp. 63 and 65.Google Scholar
6 des Innern, Der Bundesminister, betrifft: Verfassungsschutz 1976 (Hürth, 1977), p. 60.Google Scholar
7 des Innern, Bundesministerium, Innere Sicherheit (Brünl: Druckerei R. Kattein, 1978), p. 5Google Scholar. It is important to note that the chairman of the Young Democrats, Christoph Strasser, recently said that his organization opposes anticommunism. He called anticommunism prejudiced and false. The Young Democrats is the youth group of the FDP. See Die Welt, 15 03 1979.Google Scholar
8 Die Welt, 3 10 1979Google Scholar. These results were confirmed by other researchers. See Deutsche Zeitung, 25 05 1979.Google Scholar
9 Die Welt, 4 10 1978.Google Scholar
10 See especially Sontheimer, , Das Elend unserer IntellektuellenGoogle Scholar, and Schelsky, Helmut, Die Arbeit tun die anderen. Klassenkampf und Priesterherrschaft der Intellektuellen (München, 1977).Google Scholar
11 Bormann, Manfred, Bildungsplanung in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Opladen, 1978), p. 11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12 Kanz, Heinrich, ed., Deutsche Pädagogische Zeitgeschichte (Ratingen, 1975), p. 157Google Scholar. It should be added that on 15 June 1950 the Conference of Ministers of Culture decided that political education, as a formal course of study, had to begin in the seventh grade. The ministers of culture hoped that this course would contribute towards the establishment of a democratic form of life in the Federal Republic.
13 Rülcker, and Rülcker, , Soziale Normen, p. 49Google Scholar and Benner, Dietrich, Hauptströmungen der Erziehungswissenschaft (München, 1973), pp. 134 and 143Google Scholar. See also Messerschmid, Felix, “25 Jahre politische Bildung im Wandel,” in Bürger im Staat, ed. Pfizer, Theodor (Stuttgart, 1971)Google Scholar. Messerschmid says that from 1955 to 1961 political studies in West German universities centered on the question of value-free politics and the study of power, and from 1961 to 1968 empirical studies of political affairs became the center of academic interest.
14 Rülcker, and Rülcker, , Soziale Normen, p. 75Google Scholar. This deification of science, in the form of empiricism, has achieved a position of virtual dominance of the social sciences in West Germany today. See especially Stüttgen, Albert, Das Dilemma der Erziehungswissenschaft (Ratingen, 1975), pp. 20–21Google Scholar; and Benner, , Hauptströmungen der ErziehungswissenschaftGoogle Scholar. The well-known West German political scientist, Klaus von Beyme, wrote that normative theories have almost no influence on the contemporary study of political science. See von Beyme, Klaus, Die politischen Theorien der Gegenwart (München: R. Piper Verlag, 1972), p. 35Google Scholar. See also Messerschmid, , “25 Jahre politische Bildung im Wandel,” p. 26.Google Scholar
15 Benner, , Haupiströmungen der Erziehungswissenschaft, p. 206Google Scholar. The quotation is from Wilhelm Dilthey. See also Rülcker, and Rülcker, , Soziale Normen, pp. 66 and 69Google Scholar. West German professors have referred to historicism as “active hermeneutic,” “structural hermeneutic,” and “cultural theory of education.” Some positivists, such as Wolfgang Brezinka, are also historicists. It is extremely rare for any contemporary West German professor of education to discuss the ideas of those scholars who oppose historicism. Professor Brezinka, for example, had never even heard of Leo Strauss, and the library at the Universität Konstanz did not, as of 1 February 1979, have a single copy of Professor Strauss's Natural Right and History.
16 Professor Harry V. Jaffa has called university professors “the decisive source of the ruling opinions in our country.” See Jaffa, Harry V., Crisis of the House Divided (Seattle, 1973), p. 10Google Scholar. His observation is equally true of West Germany today. See Noelle-Neumann, Elisabeth, Werden wir alle Proletarier? Wertewandel in unserer Gesellschaft (Zürich, 1978), p. 55.Google Scholar
17 Bath, Herbert, Emanzipation als Erziehungsziel? (Heilbrunn, 1974), pp. 38 and 48Google Scholar. See also Wehle, Gerhard, “Emanzipation,” in Pädagogik aktuell, vol. I, ed. Wehle, Gerhard (München, 1973), p. 19Google Scholar. In the most populous Land, Nordrhein Westfalen, critical theory enjoys such a good reputation at the Ministry of Culture that it has been expressly declared to be the intellectual basis of the gymnasium reform called Kollegstufe. See des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen, Kultusminister, Strukturforderung im Bildungswesen des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen. Eine Schriftenreihe des Kultusministers. Heft 17 (Ratingen, 1972), p. 54Google Scholar. See also Knepper, Herbert, Kritische Bildung. Zur Theorie einer integrierten Kollegstufe (München, 1971), p. 51Google Scholar. One of the principal architects of the Kollegstufe, Professor Herwig Blankertz, says that the Kollegstufe is supposed to take education out of the hands of exploiting, capitalist interests. See Blankertz, Herwig, “Kollegstufenversuch in Nordrhein-Westfalen — das Ende der gymnasialen Oberstufe und der Berufsschulen,” Die Deutsche Berufs und Fachschule 68 (1972), 7 and 13.Google Scholar
18 Günter Witschel says that Habermas does not belong completely to the group called critical theorists. Witschel regards Adorno and Horkheimer as the two principal authors of critical theory. Herbert Bath, on the other hand, calls Habermas one of the most important critical theorists. See Witschel, Günter, Die Erziehungslehre der Kritischen Theorie (Bonn, 1973), p. 15Google Scholar; and Bath, , Emanzipation, p. 38.Google Scholar
19 von Schrench-Notzing, Caspar, Charakterwäsche. Die amerikanische Besatzung in Deutschland und ihre Folgen (Stuttgart, 1965), p. 285Google Scholar. Adorno regarded the German personality as authoritarian. Using Adorno's analysis, the Catholic theologian Hubertus Halbfas points out that obedience was the fundamental form of behavior of the commandant at Auschwitz, that the basis of all bad systems is the authority-obedience model, and that therefore a Christian who believes in God's authority is a danger for a democracy. He sees prayer as a practice which inculcates hierarchical forms of authority and can lead to the development of citizens who are chained by the habit of obedience to power-hungry authorities. See Halbfas, Hubertus, “Gegen die Erziehung zum Gehorsam,” Vorgänge. Zeitschrift für Geseltschafts Politik, 3 (1973), 55–59.Google Scholar
20 Witschel, , Dit Erziehungslehre der Kritischen-Theorie, p. 30.Google Scholar
21 Rolf Schmiederer observes that the present movement towards political education understood as emancipation must be based on the following themes: (1) the difference between facts and values, (2) the historical and societal origins of values, and (3) the absence of unalienable rights. He says that these ideas form the basis of the scientific study of values. See Schmiederer, Rolf, Zur Kritik der Politischen Bildung (Frankfurt, 1971), pp. 73 and 81.Google Scholar
22 Noelle-Neumann, , Werden wir alle Proletarier? p. 52.Google Scholar
23 Die Welt, 19 04 1979.Google Scholar
24 Günther, Henning, Auf dem Weg zu einer neuen Schule. Die falsche Emanzipation (München, 1974), p. 33Google Scholar. Christoph and Tobias Rülcker regard emancipation as the most important goal in contemporary West German education. See Rülcker, and Rülcker, , Soziale Normen, pp. 47, 53, 57, and 78.Google Scholar
25 Bath, Herbert, Emanzipation, p. 8.Google Scholar
26 Schelsky, Helmut, Die Arbeit tun die anderen, p. 402.Google Scholar
27 Gamm, Hans-Jochen, Einführung in das Studium der Erziehungswissenschaft (München, 1974), p. 137Google Scholar. See also Biehl, Peter, “Zur theologischen Bestimmung des Religionsunterrichts,” in Religionsunterricht wohin? Neue Stimmen zum Religionsunterricht an öffentlichen Schulen, ed. Wegenast, Klaus (Gütersloh, 1971), p. 29.Google Scholar
28 Narr, Wolf-Dieter, “Ist Emanzipation struktuell möglich?” in Emanzipation, ed. Greiffenhagen, Martin (Hamburg, 1972), p. 193Google Scholar. In Frankfurt 19 emancipatory kindergartens were established in 1972 by the Frankfurt city government (SPD). The goal of these kindergartens was “… to create the prerequisites for the emancipation of the child from dependency and guardianship in order to make them capable of political action.” See Die Welt, 10 04 1978Google Scholar. The teachers' union (GEW) supports this goal, as does the SPD in Frankfurt.
29 Strzelewicz, Willy, “Erziehung zwischen Indoktrination und Emanzipation” in Bildungstradition und moderne Gesellschaft, eds. Blass, Josef Leonhard et al. (Darmstadt, 1975), p. 90Google Scholar. Kron, Friedrich W., ed., Antiautoritäre Erziehung (Bad Heilbrunn, 1973), p. 13Google Scholar. Mollenhauer, Klaus, Erziehung und Emanzipation (München, 1968), p. 10.Google Scholar
30 Kron, , Antiautoritäre Erziehung, p. 13.Google Scholar
31 Mollenhauer, , Erziehung und Emanzipation p. 11.Google Scholar
32 Weber, Erich, ed., Zur moralischen Erziehung in Unterricht und Schule (Donauwörth, 1974), p. 33.Google Scholar
33 Wehle, Gerhard, “Emanzipation,” in Pädagogik aktuell, ed. Wehle, Gerhard (München, 1973), p. 43.Google Scholar
34 Hartfiel, Günter, “Einführung,” in Emanzipation-Ideologischer Fetisch oder reale Chance, ed. Hartfiel, Günter (Opladen, 1975), p. 34CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Mollenhauer, , Erziehung und Emanzipation, p. 10Google Scholar. One is reminded of C. E. Lewis's observation: “You cannot go on ‘seeing through’ things forever. The whole point of seeing through something is to see something through it. It is good that the window should be transparent, because the street or garden beyond it is opaque. How if you saw through the garden too? It is no use trying to see through first principles. If you see through everything, then everything is transparent. But a wholly transparent world is an invisible world. To ‘see through’ all things is the same as not to see” (Lewis, C. S., The Abolition of Man [New York, 1947], p. 91).Google Scholar
35 Rohrmoser, , Zeitzeichen, p. 48Google Scholar. Rohrmoser adds that at one West German university — presumably Bremen — emancipation has been completely adopted as part of the university basic principles. At this university the only teachers allowed to be called true teachers are those who interpret their task to be permanent, emancipatory change and the reeducation of the entire society.
36 Hartfiel, , “Einführung,” p. 34.Google Scholar
37 Marcuse, Herbert, Der eindimensionale Mensch. Studien zur Ideologie der fortgeschrittenen Industriegesellschaft (Neuwied, 1970), p. 19.Google Scholar
38 Ibid., p. 38.
39 Müller-Schmid, Peter Paul, Emanzipatorische Sozialphilosophie und Pluralistisches Ordnungsdenken (Stuttgart, 1976), p. 33.Google Scholar
40 Wilhelm, Theodor, Jenseits der Emanzipation. Pädagogische Alternativen zu einem magischen Freiheitsbegriff (Stuttgart, 1975), pp. x and 6.Google Scholar
41 Günther, , Auf dem Weg zu einer neuen Schule, p. 7.Google Scholar
42 Ibid., p. 35.
43 Ibid., pp. 36 and 74.
44 Feil, Hans-Dieter, Normativer Unterricht: Ein Didaktisches Konzept zur Transparenz von Normen (München, 1977), p. 19.Google Scholar
45 The common, firm trust in science and “scientific” terminology, with which West German educators love to hide their simplistic arguments, reminds the author of Woodrow Wilson's comments about science, as quoted in Eidelberg, Paul's A Discourse on Statesmanship.Google Scholar Wilson wrote: “It has given us agnosticism in the realm of philosophy, scientific anarchism in the field of politics. … Past experience is discredited and the laws of matter are supposed to apply to the spirit and the make up of society. … It has not purged us of passion or disposed us to virtue. It has not made us less covetous or less ambitious or less self-indulgent” (Eidelberg, , A Discourse on Statesmanship: The Design and Transformation of the American Policy [Chicago, 1974], p. 296).Google Scholar
46 Feil, , Normativer Unterricht, pp. 12–16.Google Scholar
47 Ibid., p. 17.
48 Oerter, Rolf, “Zur Rolle der Schule im Sozialisierungs und Erziehungsprozess,” in Zur moralischen Erziehung in Unterricht und Schule, ed. Weber, Erich (Donauwörth, 1974), p. 72.Google Scholar It is almost impossible to find a recent book about ethics or morality in West German schools that does not at least discuss the concept of emancipation. Many books address ethics only from the standpoint of emancipation. See Ibid., p. 9.
49 Hammel, Walter, Aspekte sittlicher Erziehung (Bad Heilbrunn, 1976), p. 78.Google Scholar
50 Ibid., pp. 79–80.
51 Korff, W., Norm und Sittlichkeit (Mainz, 1973), p. 18Google Scholar
52 Kopp, Ferdinand, “Erziehungsaufgaben für Unterricht und Schule,” in Zur moralischen Erziehung in Unterricht und Schule, ed. Weber, Erich (Donauwörth, 1974), p. 58.Google Scholar
53 Hammel, , Aspekte sittlicher Erziehung, p. 84.Google Scholar
54 Ibid., p. 85.
55 Ibid., pp. 88–90.
56 Primarily, however, the teacher of emancipation can only help a pupil to reach moral decisions when he shows the pupil what barriers lie in his path to emancipation.
57 Muth, Jakob, Pädagogischer Takt (Heidelberg, 1962), p. 35.Google Scholar
58 Reiche, Reimut, Sexualität und Klassenkampf. Zur Abwehr repressiver Entsublimierung (Frankfurt, 1971), p. 34.Google Scholar
59 Brockmann, Gerhard et al. Religion in der Sekundarstufe II (Frankfurt, 1976), p. 7.Google Scholar
60 Kerstiens, Ludwig, Modelle Emanzipatorischer Erziehung (Bad Heilbrunn, 1974), p. 23.Google Scholar
61 Sontheimer, Kurt, Das Elend unserer Intellektuellen. Linke Theorie in der Bundesrepublik (Hamburg, 1976), pp. 232 and 235.Google Scholar
62 Ibid., pp. 233–34.
63 Gottschalch, Wilfried, Bedingungen und Chancen politischer Sozialisation (Frankfurt, 1972), p. 23.Google Scholar
64 Kerstiens, , Modelle Emanzipatorischer Erziehung, p. 157.Google Scholar
65 Ibid., p. 167.
66 Ibid., p. 166. On the public examination of norms, see Jaffa, Harry V., “Political Philosophy and Honor: The Leo Strauss Dissertation Award,” Modern Age (Fall 1977), pp. 387–94.Google Scholar Kerstiens seems to have forgotten that “it is from habit, and only from habit, that law derives the validity which secures obedience. But habit can be created only by the passage of time; and a readiness to change from existing to new and different laws will accordingly tend to weaken the power of law” (Aristotle Politics 1269a24). What Aristotle says about law applies equally to moral values.
67 Narr, , “Ist Emanzipation struktuell möglich?” pp. 194, 198, 201, and 207.Google Scholar
68 Ibid., pp. 198–199.
69 Ibid., p. 201.
70 Ibid., p. 207.
71 Ibid., p. 214. Like Narr, Professor Giesecke believes that the goal of emancipation is “… to program into the educational process the demand for the change of society.” See Hildebrandt, Walter, “Wider den politischen Missbrauch des Lehrers,” in Klassenkampf und Bildungsreform, ed. Kaltenbrunner, Gerd-Klaus (München, 1974), p. 92.Google Scholar
72 Giesecke, Hermann, Einführung in die Pädagogik (München, 1969), p. 95.Google Scholar
73 Giesecke, Hermann, Didaktik der politischen Bildung (München, 1972), p. 126.Google Scholar
74 Hesse, Hans Albrecht, “Über den Gebrauch des Begriffs Emanzipation in der erziehungswissenschaftlichen Literatur der Gegenwart,” in EmanzipationGoogle Scholar, ed. Greiffenhagen, , p. 252.Google Scholar
75 Strzelewicz, , “Erziehung zwischen Indoktrination und Emanzipation,” p. 100.Google Scholar
76 Schulz, Wolfgang, “Revision der Didaktik,” betrifft: erziehung 5 (1972), 22Google Scholar
77 Gamm, Hans-Jochen, Einführung in das Studium der Erziehungswissenschaft (München, 1974), p. 117.Google Scholar
78 Ibid., p. 118.
79 Ibid., p. 119. Bernd Guggenberger notes that the New Left has more or less abandoned the antiauthoritarian label and put itself largely under the Marxist flag. See Guggenberger, Bernd, Die Neubestimmung des subjektiven Faktors im Neomarxismus (München, 1973).Google Scholar
80 Klafki, Wolfgang, ed., Erziehungswissenschaft (Frankfurt, 1970), p. 85.Google Scholarvon Hentig, Hertmut, Systemzwang und Selbstbestimmung (Stuttgart, 1974), p. 10.Google ScholarClaussen, B., “Emanzipation — Normengefüge — Erziehung,” Zeitschrift für Pädagogik 19 (1973), 124.Google Scholar
81 Lempert, Wolfgang, “Zum Begriff der Emanzipation,” in EmanzipationGoogle Scholar, ed. Greiffenhaben, , p. 218.Google Scholar
82 Breddermann, Hanjo, “Über Sexualaufklärung in der Schule,” in Kinderkreuzzug oder Beginnt die Revolution in den Schulen (Reinbek, 1971), p. 154Google Scholar; and Gamrn, Hans-Jochen, Kritische Schule. Eine Streitschrift für die Emanzipation von Lehrern und Schulern (München, 1970), pp. 78 and 142.Google Scholar
83 Vierzig, Siegfried, “Christentum und Emanzipation,” in Emanzipation und Religionspädagogik, ed. Offele, Wolfgang (Köln, 1972), p. 39.Google Scholar
84 Ibid., p. 40.
85 Ibid., p. 44. Botho Hermann agrees. He says that Jesus wanted to emancipate the world from religious and Pharisaic tutelage. See Hermann, Botho, “Befreiter Religionsunterricht,” in Religionsunterricht wohin? Neue Stimmen zum Religionsunterricht an öffentlichen Schulen, ed. Wegenast, Klaus (Gutersloh, 1971), p. 211.Google Scholar
86 Stoodt, Dieter, “Information und Interaktion in Religionsunterricht,” in Religionsunterricht wohin?Google Scholar ed. Wegenast, , p. 298.Google Scholar
87 Wilhelm, , Jenseits der Emanzipation, p. 16.Google Scholar The theologian Heinz-Dietrich Wendland agrees. See Wendland, Heinz-Dietrich, “Über den gegenwärtigen Stand der Sozialethik,” in Sozialethik im Umbruch der Gesellschaft, ed. Wendland, Heinz-Dietrich (Göttingen, Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1969), p. 21.Google Scholar Christian Gremmels warns that if the slogan, Marxist “emancipation”Google Scholar becomes part of Evangelical theology, the theological tradition will be broken. See Gremmels, Christian, “Emanzipation und Erlosung,” in Emanzipation und Religionspädagogik, ed. Offele, Wolfgang (Köln, Benziger Verlag, 1972), p. 22.Google Scholar Dr. Gisela Winkler maintains that the Christian Church has adopted much of the emancipatory pedagogy. See Die Welt, 24 08 1977.Google Scholar
88 Reller, Horst, ed., Schule ohne Religion (Berlin, 1971), p. 9.Google Scholar
89 In my dissertation, Politics and Ethics in West Germany: A Study of Ethical Goals in Schools and Societies, I examined carefully the educational guidelines for courses in ethics, Catholic and Evangelical religion, and the study of society in eight of the ten official Länder (West Berlin is regarded as an unofficial Land). The educational bureaucrats in those Länder emphasize emancipation as an educational goal of the first rank. The language used varies somewhat from Land to Land, but the themes for study are nearly identical. However, the language used in the educational guidelines for Land Hessen and Nordrhein-Westfalen is more openly Marxist-critical theory than that used in the other Länder.
90 In Land Hessen, the minister of culture, Krollmann, strongly encourages parents to send their children to the Gesamtschule (comprehensive school), but he doesn't send his own children there. They attend a gymnasium.
91 Rolff, Hans G., “Die Demokratie der Unmündigen?” in Die autoritäre Gesellschaft, ed. Hartfiel, Günter (Opladen, 1970), p. 109.Google Scholar
92 Hessen, Kultusminister, Rahmenrichtlinien. Sekundarstufe I. Katholische Religion (Frankfurt, 1977), p. 11.Google Scholar
93 Ibid., p. 33.
91 Ibid., pp. 52–53.
95 Ibid., p. 85.
96 Ibid.
97 Ibid., pp. 14 and 16.
98 Ibid., p. 21. It is never made clear what the Hessen Ministry of Culture means by a humane society, or what concretely, finding oneself means.
99 Ibid., p. 67. Tolerance is called the basic prerequisite for social life.
100 Ibid., p. 86.
101 Ibid., pp. 69 and 85.
102 Ibid., p. 95.
103 Strauss, Leo, What Is Political Philosophy? (Westport, 1975), p. 36.Google Scholar
104 Nipperdey, Thomas, Konflikt—Einzige Wahrheit der Gesellschaft (Osnabrück, 1974), p. 103.Google Scholar
105 Ibid., p. 99.
106 Hessen, Kultusministerium, Rahmenrichtlinien Primarstufe Evangelische Religion (1972), p. 11.Google Scholar
107 Ibid., pp. 14, 15, 17, and 26.
108 Hessen, Kultusministerium, Entwurf: Richtlinien für einen Ethikunterricht (1977), pp. 3 and 7.Google Scholar
109 Ibid., pp. 2–3.
110 Ibid., p. 2.
111 Ibid., pp. 3–4.
112 Günther, , Auf dem Weg zu einer neuen Schule, pp. 15 and 30.Google Scholar Professor Strauss comments: “Yet the possibilities of the future are not unlimited as long as the differences between men and angels and between men and brutes have not been abolished, or as long as there are political things. The possibilities of the future are not wholly unknown, since their limits are known.” (Strauss, , What Is Political Philosophy? p. 71.)Google Scholar
113 Gildin, Hilail, ed., Political Philosophy: Six Essays by Leo Strauss (New York, 1975), p. 97.Google Scholar
114 Jaffa, , Conditions of Freedom, p. 153.Google Scholar
115 See Gorschenck, Günter, ed., Grundwerte in Staat und Gesellschaft (München, 1977).Google Scholar