At the Limits of Political Philosophy: From "Brilliant Errors" to Things of Uncommon Importance

5. Regarding the Inattentiveness to Hell in Political Philosophy

FIVE Regarding the Inattentiveness to Hell in Political Philosophy "Dr. Johnson surprised him [Mr. John Henderson] not a little, by acknuwledging with a look ofhorrour, that he was much oppressed by the fear ofdeath. The amiable Dr. Adams suggested that God was infinitely good. Johnson. 'That he is infinitely good, as far as the perfection of his nature will alluw, [ certainly believe; but it is necessaryfor good upon the whole, that individuals should be punished. As to an individual, therefore, he is not infinitely good; and as [ cannot be sure that [ have fulfilled the conditions on which salvatzon M granted, [ am afraid[ may be one ofthose who shall be damned.' (looking dismally). Dr. Adams. 'What do you mean by damned?' Johnson. (passionately and loudly,) 'Sent to Hell, Sir, and punished everlastingly!' Dr. Adams. '[ don't believe in that doctrine.' Johnson. 'Hold, Sir, do you belteve that some will be punished at all?' Dr. Adams. 'Being excludedfrom Heaven will be a punishment; yet there may be no great posztive suffering.'Johnson. 'Well, Sir; but, ifyou admit any degree ofpunMhment, there is an end ofyour argument . .. for, infinite goodness would mjlzct no punMhment whatever. There is not infinite goodness physzcally considered; morally there is.'" -Boswell's Life ofJohnson, 17841 The preceding chapter on evil, the following chapter on death, and the present chapter on hell seem, at first sight, peculiarly odd in a reflection on political philosophy. Yet, as I have suggested, they lie at the natural origins of the "brilliant errors" that have so 1. Boswell's Life ofJohnson (London: Oxford, 1931), II, pp. 554-55. 89 go THE GROUNDS OF POLITICAL REALISM agitated the history of political philosophy. None of these topics is normally treated in any significant manner in political philosophy . Each looks to a different side of the unpleasant aspects of the human condition, however much each is related to man's being in the world. In revelation, hell and death are seen to be results of evil, even though they were not intended to exist from the beginning. But can a consideration of evil, hell, and death in political philosophy yield fertile results? 1. The Political E lemmt in Traditional Religion Patient reflection on this trio will, I think, bring much insight. Considered carefully, each of these subjects brings us a more profound reflection on the whole of reality, which, as I have indicated , it is the purpose of this book to present and clarify. The need to reflect on and confront evil is an obviously crucial aspect of political philosophy, as I have indicated in the previous chapter. The very power to choose evil makes each human life and choice potentially dramatic and full of ultimate risk. This power lies at the foundation of human worth. The present discussion on hell appears in political philosophy not from religion, though it has its place there, but from the Tenth Book of Plato's Republic, where the rewards and punishments in actual political life are considered. Let me frankly admit that the title of this present chapter on the neglect of hell (as well as Johnson'S response to Dr. Adams cited above) is deliberately provocative to the modern mind-to any mind, in fact. But nobody likes to speak of this controverted topic of hell unless enticed to do so by the suspicion that to neglect it will leave something basic out of consideration. Not to reflect on the topic seems like a voluntary closing off of something that ought to be wondered about, whatever we think ofit in the beginning. I submit here that political philosophy itself forces us to treat this topic if we wish to reach a complete understanding of this discipline. Leo Strauss cautiously touched on the importance of this topic in his Thoughts on Machiavelli: The beginnings of men (in Machiavelli's view) were imperfect and low. Man is exposed, and not protected, essentially and from the beginning . Therefore the perfection envisaged by both the Bible and Inatttmtivtmess to Hell classical philosophy is impossible. But for the same reason for which perfection, and in particular the initial as well as the ultimate Paradise is impossible, there cannot be a Hell. Man cannot rise above earthly [sic] and earthly humanity and therefore he ought not even to aspire beyond humanity. Such aspiration merely leads to the most terrible and wholly unnecessary inhumanity of man to man.2 In Machiavelli's reasoning...