Strauss’d

primarily used in an academic setting to describe a scenario where a person has no choice but to mindlessly follow along with a situation that may have negative consequences or be completely void of logic and reason.

this originally referred to the kafkaesque attempt to learn the philosophy of the german-jew leo strauss (an attempt best described as a futile, self-infliction of mental anguish) but has since evolved into a more generic term. professors and advocates of strauss’ philosophy are known for being staunch defenders of his writings through even the most devastating of critiques.

characteristics of strauss’ writings are:

-summing up the ideologies and life’s work of a philosopher in a brief, p-ssing remark when a thorough and in-depth knowledge would be necessary to comprehend the arguments being made.
-writing ironically or, without warning, speaking from the perspective of a writer he completely disagrees with.

-using the same logical fallacies that he criticizes in others.
-writing an endnote that fills multiple pages of text.

the term is applied when an absurd lack of reason or logic has forced the victim into an uncomfortable corner.
student a: “but didn’t aristotle say (example)?”
professor: “ah but strauss said about aristotle that (loosely related example). does that make more sense now?”
student a: “ok…”
student b: -whispers- “you got strauss’d”
———————–
student a: “how are your finals going?”
student b: “fine, except my professor moved up the due
date on the term paper. now i have 3 papers due on the same day.”
student a: “you got strauss’d.”
———————–