Heidegger showed the young Strauss that modern philosophy had never understood Aristotle. One cannot have refuted what one hasn't even understood. I leave the possibility of an intentional misunderstanding to one side. So Strauss understands Plato. Strauss himself the character that interrogates the moderns and pre-modern as Colombo like Socrates; and what kind of person doesn't love Colombo or Socrates?
Given the lack of views and, comments, it is now apparent to me why it is the job of superior man, to rule over the inferior as, they’re not here, attempting to learn something!
I have come to believe that this is an issue of circular referentialities in our culture and not of general human capacity. It seems, that part of our collective for a variety of reasons must continue to experience moments, in which they sense the gravity and importance of such deductions for life - with a notion of personal and furtheron interpersonal significance, that is sufficient for them to seek, continue and amplify them, which is what makes a tradition, since it has become interpersonal and intersubjective by that. It is however true, that they seem to rarely voice themselves on the internet these days. I understand the comment above as an expression of this impression of rarity, however it is yet associated to the hierarchical notion of capacity, which is at the heart of the seemingly omnipresent (latent) modern social darwinism, that stands in circular relation to justifying such a hierarchical society. Short: It's self inductive.
