The focal point around which
the entire argument of this book revolves is that the cardinal goal of instruction in whatever field, from physics to etiquette to race relations, should be the development of loyalty to what is excellent, instead of success in satisfying desires.
Not exact matches
Werner Jaeger, who has written the classic history
of the idea
of paideia, [2] pointed out in a later
book on Early Christianity and Greek Paideia that Clement not only uses literary forms and types
of argument calculated to sway people formed by paideia but, beyond that, he explicitly praises paideia in such a way as to make it clear that his
entire epistle is to be taken «as an act
of Christian education.»
For critical discussions
of Ogden's
argument and the
entire book, see Langdon B. Gilkey, «A Theology in Process,» Interpretation, XXI, 4 (October 1967), 447 - 459; Ray L. Hart, «Schubert Ogden on the Reality
of God,» Religion In Life, XXXVI, 4 (Winter 1967), 506 - 515; Antony Flew, «Reflections on «The Reality
of God»,» The Journal
of Religion, 48, 2 (April 1968), 150 - 161: and Robert C. Neville, «Neoclassical Metaphysics and Christianity: A Critical Study
of Ogden's Reality
of God,» International Philosophical Quarterly, IX, 4 (December 1969), 605 - 624.
Yes, the
argument hinges somewhat on to whom the
book was addressed and whom is accused in 3:9
of robbing the
entire nation (it does seem strange that the people would be accused
of robbing themselves).