Nature, Law, and the Sacred: Essays in Honor of Ronna Burger (Video)

  • [Music]
  • Hi everyone. I'm Ronna Burger. I'm a Professor  in the Department of Philosophy at Tulane,  
  • and I teach in the Jewish Studies program, and  I'm the Director of the Religious Studies minor.  
  • I'm so pleased to say a word today about this book,
  • Nature, Law, and the Sacred. To clarify the outset,  aside from the bibliography at the end and  
  • references throughout, this is not my own writing  but a collection of essays that was published in  
  • my honor. It belongs to the old German tradition  of a Festschrift, a volume put together usually for a  
  • professor or a mentor meant to show the influence  of that scholar's work. It's a treat especially  
  • to present the book here and now because it was  edited by my first PhD student, Evanthia Speliotis  
  • at Tulane, and many of the contributors along with  colleagues and friends are my graduate students  
  • from many cohorts over four decades. I came here  for one year and it somehow turned into forty.  
  • I think it was especially Katrina when so many  of our colleagues left that I realized this was  
  • my intellectual home. I was able to flourish here,  writing and teaching, and I felt committed to it.  
  • So the title, Nature, Law, and the Sacred, expresses  the central themes that run through  
  • all the essays in the collection. Things that  can be encapsulated, I think, in the formula,  
  • Jerusalem and Athens, or bible and  philosophy- bible and Greek philosophy.  
  • Those two roots of the whole western  tradition lie at the core of all my writing and  
  • all my teaching. And looking back I realized they  guided, mostly inadvertently, my own intellectual  
  • development. So maybe I can say a word about  that. Early on I was really fascinated by  
  • what I found to be the puzzling stories of the  bible and the pleasures of trying to interpret  
  • them. I think that was my way into philosophy and  when I got to college I knew right away I wanted  
  • to be a philosophy major and I was especially  attracted to Plato. That passion eventually drove  
  • me to graduate school and my dissertation  is an interpretation of Plato's Phaedrus.  
  • That's the dialogue in which he most explicitly  shows why he did not write philosophic treatises  
  • of dialogues. And therefore nothing is- Plato writes  nothing in his own name, but invites the reader  
  • to discover the underlying argument  by interpreting the drama as a whole.  
  • As I'm sure many of you know, Socrates never  wrote anything. Socrates, who's represented in  
  • Plato's dialogues, did not write at all. He  believed that philosophy has to be pursued  
  • by a live conversation with particular  individuals. And writing, he claims, doesn't  
  • know when to speak and when to remain silent. It  doesn't know how to adjust its speeches to souls.  
  • That Socratic claim though, we learn of it  through the representation in Plato's written  
  • work. It took a while for that paradox to sink  in for me. When it does, you realize that Plato  
  • discovered an art of writing that overcomes  all the particular criticisms he puts into the  
  • voice of Socrates. And that enables him, through  his written work, to reproduce with his reader  
  • the experience of a live Socratic conversation.  With that insight I went on to write a book on  
  • Plato's Veto, the dialogue that takes place  in prison on the last day of Socrates life,  
  • where he's presenting a series of  arguments for the immortality of the soul.  
  • Now most commentators have found those arguments  very flawed. What I tried to do was demonstrate  
  • that exactly those flaws are the deliberate  keys that Plato provides for his reader  
  • to reconstruct the teaching of the work.  And that is basically an affirmation  
  • of Socrates' understanding of the goodness of  the philosophic life, the life that he's led.  
  • From Plato the natural step to move on would  be to Aristotle, his student. That took me many  
  • years. You know, I think many of us experience  Aristotle's treatises as rather abstract and dry.  
  • So it was a while before I really came  to develop my deep appreciation of how  
  • much those treatises are actually in the  inquisitive spirit of a Platonic dialogue.  
  • And that was mostly through teaching,  especially Aristotle's ethics,  
  • where I started getting a stronger and stronger  feeling of how Aristotle engages his reader  
  • in the questions he's raising: What is  happiness? What is human virtue? What is  
  • friendship or pleasure? Above all, the Socratic  question: What is the good life for a human being?  
  • From Aristotle I was led to Maimonides, the  medieval Jewish thinker, who really wrestled with  
  • the problem of the possible conflict between the  bible and Greek philosophy, as did most medieval  
  • thinkers. Is there a way to interpret the bible  that's compatible with philosophy and science?  
  • Maimonides finally really led me back to  my original fascination with the bible  
  • and I've been teaching a series of courses, Bible  and Philosophy, with a different topic every term.  
  • This time I'm doing women in the bible. Last  semester I did the political world of the bible.  
  • And discussions with students in these  classes have stimulated me to be working  
  • on philosophic readings of the bible that are  presented at public lectures or in articles.
  • So these themes in my own work, Nature,  Law, and the Sacred, in this collection  
  • are displayed in range far beyond my own  competence. The chapters of the volume  
  • interpret foundational texts starting from  antiquity, but not overplayed on Aristotle. 
  • Also the tragedians, Sophocles and Euripides,  the common poet, Aristophanes, the writer, Xenophon,  
  • who also wrote up Socratic recollections- not  well enough known- I'm teaching him this semester.  
  • The book moves on to medieval thinkers:  Maimonides, also Boccaccio, and Dante. And  
  • then to the modern philosophers: from Descartes and  Montesquieu, to Kant, Lessing, Hegel, and Kierkegaard.  
  • Although the pieces are written independently,  put together as parts of a whole they display  
  • such really intriguing connections, I think, that  show how the problem of the relations among  
  • nature, law, and the sacred show up both in works  of literature and in philosophy over centuries.  
  • For me, each of these chapters represents  the starting point of future conversations.  
  • Sometimes exciting projects  of writing or teaching now.  
  • Other readers, I hope and expect, will be inspired  to pursue their own exploration of the classic  
  • works analyzed here. They're very rich treasures  and they've, I think, endured for thousands of years  
  • only because of the way they probe fundamental  questions about the human condition that help us  
  • understand our own times and our lives. Something   really especially important for us now. Well,  
  • would love to continue the conversation.  Feel free to get in touch with me and bye for now.
  • [Music]