I wish this institution the greatest success. Having been a professor for 35 years at a neighboring institution and watched it strangle what used to be distinguished, humanistic disciplines all at the behest of a leftist propaganda machine, I applaud all attempts to give these disciplines a new footing.
I have longed for an institution of this caliber and loved the video with references to Hamlet, which my son of 14 and I are currently studying together. If this newly founded university continues to strive to improve upon its present path, I wouldn't hesitate to immerse my son in its classical pedagogy. Besides, any place of higher education that thinks so highly of Shakespeare and Hamlet definitely has my vote of support ; )
I have to question your "dedication to the fearless pursuit of the truth." Your website favorably highlights Leo Strauss, a proponent of the scandalously incompetent and provably false Lockean interpretation of the Declaration of Independence.
I read the books that the Founders read in college and as part of their legal training. Standout authors were Hutcheson, Burlamaqui and Vattel, following the profoundly anti-Lockean ancient Roman Cicero.
Happiness, in the minds of the leading Founders, was the byproduct of being habitually good to others. This is the core of "virtue," which is part of the anti-Lockean 1776 congressional definition of happiness in the original May 1776 independence resolution, which I present in this brief peer-reviewed article:
Francis Hutcheson (not Locke) stated that we have "unalienable rights" (matching our inescapable duties), and that government's violation of our unalienable rights gives rise to the collective right of resistance.
Burlamaqui (not Locke) stated that government exists to secure natural rights, with natural right understood in terms of the pursuit of "true and solid" happiness, as opposed to the ephemeral object of self-centered Lockean striving.
Vattel, a student of Burlamaqui at the University of Geneva, wrote the prescription (followed by the Founders) for declaring independence.
My alma mater, Dartmouth College, doesn't offer any course on the moral philosophy & jurisprudence that informed the collective mind of the American Founders. Neither do any of the other Ivy League schools, or any other college in the U.S.A. (as far as I'm aware). Here is an opportunity for the University of Austin to show its dedication to the "fearless pursuit of the truth."
John Schmeeckle
Chattanooga, Tennessee
p.s. Applying the Founders' "rights derived from duties" doctrine to the 2nd Amendment:
We have (had) the duty to show up for militia training. Therefore, we have the constitutional right to own any gun that could reasonably be brought to militia training.
Any institution that can harmonize existence, history, and humanity interdependently, will be facilitating an ideological response to the questions of existence that must be consistent and non-contradictory with its responses to history and humanity; otherwise, that ideological system will be weak, unstable, and prone to collapse. Regarding the perspective on human beings, there exist two viewpoints: 1 - Deterministic 2 - Voluntary
From a deterministic perspective, under scholasticism, and Hellenism promoted by Aristotle, humans have no capacity for freedom and choice. In this view, humans are merely players in a dark, grim drama. Therefore, there is no difference between oppressive forces and revolutionaries who sacrifice everything for the freedom of their people and country. One has become an oppressor by compulsion, and the other has become a revolutionary through blind determinism. Such a human being has no choice.
From this deterministic viewpoint, the very notion of individual criticism, self-critique, or the meaningfulness of reward and punishment is called into question. It challenges us to reconsider our understanding of human agency and moral responsibility.
I wish this institution the greatest success. Having been a professor for 35 years at a neighboring institution and watched it strangle what used to be distinguished, humanistic disciplines all at the behest of a leftist propaganda machine, I applaud all attempts to give these disciplines a new footing.
Congratulations! Realizing this project is a great achievement. I wish you continued success.
Will you be making other suggested readings from your courses available online?
I have longed for an institution of this caliber and loved the video with references to Hamlet, which my son of 14 and I are currently studying together. If this newly founded university continues to strive to improve upon its present path, I wouldn't hesitate to immerse my son in its classical pedagogy. Besides, any place of higher education that thinks so highly of Shakespeare and Hamlet definitely has my vote of support ; )
Congratulations, University of Austin!
I have to question your "dedication to the fearless pursuit of the truth." Your website favorably highlights Leo Strauss, a proponent of the scandalously incompetent and provably false Lockean interpretation of the Declaration of Independence.
In graduate school, I demolished this Lockean interpretation of the Declaration of Independence, but my research has been suppressed by the editor whose scholarship I destroyed, as exposed in detail in this 50-page paper based on my Master's thesis: https://www.academia.edu/29164747/The_Declaration_of_Independence_without_Locke_A_Rebuttal_of_Michael_Zuckerts_Natural_Rights_Republic_
I read the books that the Founders read in college and as part of their legal training. Standout authors were Hutcheson, Burlamaqui and Vattel, following the profoundly anti-Lockean ancient Roman Cicero.
Happiness, in the minds of the leading Founders, was the byproduct of being habitually good to others. This is the core of "virtue," which is part of the anti-Lockean 1776 congressional definition of happiness in the original May 1776 independence resolution, which I present in this brief peer-reviewed article:
https://startingpointsjournal.com/the-may-resolution-and-the-declaration-of-independence/
Francis Hutcheson (not Locke) stated that we have "unalienable rights" (matching our inescapable duties), and that government's violation of our unalienable rights gives rise to the collective right of resistance.
Burlamaqui (not Locke) stated that government exists to secure natural rights, with natural right understood in terms of the pursuit of "true and solid" happiness, as opposed to the ephemeral object of self-centered Lockean striving.
Vattel, a student of Burlamaqui at the University of Geneva, wrote the prescription (followed by the Founders) for declaring independence.
My alma mater, Dartmouth College, doesn't offer any course on the moral philosophy & jurisprudence that informed the collective mind of the American Founders. Neither do any of the other Ivy League schools, or any other college in the U.S.A. (as far as I'm aware). Here is an opportunity for the University of Austin to show its dedication to the "fearless pursuit of the truth."
John Schmeeckle
Chattanooga, Tennessee
p.s. Applying the Founders' "rights derived from duties" doctrine to the 2nd Amendment:
We have (had) the duty to show up for militia training. Therefore, we have the constitutional right to own any gun that could reasonably be brought to militia training.
As a new-ish Austin resident, I can't wait to see how this turns out. It's about time someone took a stand to reform higher ed.
So exciting! Cannot wait for more news
Very exciting....great article......keep us posted!!!
Any institution that can harmonize existence, history, and humanity interdependently, will be facilitating an ideological response to the questions of existence that must be consistent and non-contradictory with its responses to history and humanity; otherwise, that ideological system will be weak, unstable, and prone to collapse. Regarding the perspective on human beings, there exist two viewpoints: 1 - Deterministic 2 - Voluntary
From a deterministic perspective, under scholasticism, and Hellenism promoted by Aristotle, humans have no capacity for freedom and choice. In this view, humans are merely players in a dark, grim drama. Therefore, there is no difference between oppressive forces and revolutionaries who sacrifice everything for the freedom of their people and country. One has become an oppressor by compulsion, and the other has become a revolutionary through blind determinism. Such a human being has no choice.
From this deterministic viewpoint, the very notion of individual criticism, self-critique, or the meaningfulness of reward and punishment is called into question. It challenges us to reconsider our understanding of human agency and moral responsibility.