Howdy, MOQers:

The following is quoted from Trotsky and the Wild Orchids (1992) by Richard 
Rorty:



Please notice that he paints a stark contrast between Dewey's Pragmatism and 
Plato's absolutism and the cozy relationship between absolutism and theism. 
Aristotle looms large but there is no mention of Whitehead, which was, I 
learned elsewhere, apparently relegated to the theology department. Make of it 
what you will but I see a young man struggling to find a really true Truth that 
can never be found and then realizing that he had to give up his quest for 
Platonic certainty before he could become a Pragmatist.



When I got to Chicago (in 1946), I found that Hutchins, together with his 
friends Mortimer Adler and Richard McKeon (the villain of Pirsig's Zen and the 
Art of Motorcycle Maintenance), had enveloped much of the University of Chicago 
in a neo-Aristotelian mystique. The most frequent target of their sneers was 
John Dewey's pragmatism. That pragmatism was the philosophy of my parents' 
friend Sidney Hook, as well as the unofficial philosophy of most of the other 
New York intellectuals who had given up on dialectical materialism. But 
according to Hutchins and Adier, pragmatism was vulgar, 'relativistic', and 
self-refuting. As they pointed out over and over again, Dewey had absolutes. To 
say, as Dewey did, that 'growth itself is the only moral end', left one without 
a criterion for growth, and thus with no way refute Hitler's suggestion that 
Germany had 'grown' under his rule.  To say that truth is what works is to 
reduce the quest for truth to the quest for power. Only an appeal to something 
eternal, absolute, and good – like the God of St Thomas, or the 'nature of 
human beings' described by Aristotle – would permit one to answer the Nazis, to 
justify one's choice of social democracy over fascism.

This quest for stable absolutes was common to the neo-Thomist and to Leo 
Strauss, the teacher who attracted the best of the Chicago students (including 
my classmate Allan Bloom). The Chicago faculty was dotted with awesomely 
learned refugees from Hitler, of which Strauss was the most revered. All of 
them seemed to agree that something deeper and weightier than Dewey was needed 
if one was to explain why it would be better to be dead than to be a Nazi.  
This sounded pretty good to my 15-year-old ears. For moral and philosophical 
absolutes sounded a bit like my beloved orchids – numinous, hard to find, known 
only to a chosen few. Further, since Dewey was a hero to all the people among 
whom I had grown up, scorning [9] Dewey was a convenient form of adolescent 
revolt.  The only question was whether this scorn should take a religious or a 
philosophical form, and how it might be combined with striving for social 
justice.

Like many of my classmates at Chicago , I knew lots of T. S. Eliot by heart. I 
was attracted by Eliot's suggestions that only committed Christians (and 
perhaps only Anglo-Catholics) could overcome their unhealthy preoccupation with 
their private obsessions, and so serve their fellow humans with proper 
humility. But a prideful inability to believe what I was saying when I recited 
the General Confession gradually led me to give up on my awkward attempts to 
get religion.  So I fell back on absolutist philosophy.

I read through Plato during my fifteenth summer, and convinced myself that 
Socrates was right – virtue was knowledge. That claim was music to my ears, for 
I had doubts about my own moral character and a suspicion that my only gifts 
were intellectual ones. Besides, Socrates had to be right, for only then could 
one hold reality and justice in a single vision. Only if he were right could 
one hope to be both as good as the best Christians (such as Alyosha in The 
Brothers Karamazov, whom I could not – and still cannot – decide whether to 
envy or despise) and as learned and clever as Strauss and his students.  So I 
decided to major in philosophy. I figured that if I became a philosopher I 
might get to the top of Plato's 'divided line' – the place 'beyond hypotheses' 
where the full sunshine of Truth irradiates the purified soul of the wise and 
good: an Elysian field dotted with immaterial orchids. It seemed obvious to me 
that getting to such a place was what everybody with any brains really wanted. 
It also seemed clear that Platonism had all the advantages of religion, without 
requiring the humility which Christianity demanded, and of which I was 
apparently incapable.

For all these reasons, I wanted very much to be some kind of Platonist, and 
from 15 to 20 I did my best. But it didn't pan out. I could never figure out 
whether the Platonic philosopher was aiming at the ability to offer irrefutable 
argument - argument which rendered him able to convince anyone he encountered 
of what he believed (the sort of thing Ivan Karamazov was good at) – or instead 
was aiming [10] at a sort of incommunicable, private bliss (the sort of thing 
his brother Alyosha seemed to possess). The first goal is to achieve 
argumentative power over others – e.g., to become able to convince bullies that 
they should not beat one up, or to convince rich capitalists that they must 
cede their power to a cooperative, egalitarian commonwealth. The second goal is 
to enter a state in which all your own doubts are stilled, but in which you no 
longer wish to argue. Both goals seemed desirable, but I could not see how they 
could be fitted together.

At the same time as I was worrying about this tension within Platonism – and 
within any form of what Dewey had called 'the quest for certainty' – I was also 
worrying about the familiar problem of how one could possibly get a noncircular 
justification of any debatable stand on any important issue. The more 
philosophers I read, the clearer it seemed that each of them could carry their 
views back to first principles which were incompatible with the first 
principles of their opponents, and that none of them ever got to that fabled 
place 'beyond hypotheses'. There seemed to be nothing like a neutral standpoint 
from which these alternative first principles could be evaluated. But if there 
were no such standpoint, then the whole idea of 'rational certainty', and the 
whole Socratic-Platonic idea of replacing passion by reason, seemed not to make 
much sense.


--------------------


Here is the entire essay for those who are interested: 
http://cdclv.unlv.edu/pragmatism/rorty_orchids.html

Rorty-Wild Orchids - University of Nevada, Las 
Vegas<http://cdclv.unlv.edu/pragmatism/rorty_orchids.html>
cdclv.unlv.edu
Trotsky and the Wild Orchids (1992) Richard Rorty (Reprinted from Philosophy 
and Social Hope, Penguin Books, 1999). [3] If there is anything to the idea 
that the best ...




Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org/md/archives.html
MOQ Online - MOQ_Discuss<http://moq.org/md/archives.html>
moq.org
Robert M. Pirsig's MoQ deals with the fundamentals of existence and provides a 
more coherent system for understanding reality than our current paradigms allow


MOQ Online - MOQ_Discuss<http://moq.org/md/archives.html>
MOQ Online - MOQ_Discuss<http://moq.org/md/archives.html>
moq.org
Robert M. Pirsig's MoQ deals with the fundamentals of existence and provides a 
more coherent system for understanding reality than our current paradigms allow


moq.org
Robert M. Pirsig's MoQ deals with the fundamentals of existence and provides a 
more coherent system for understanding reality than our current paradigms allow


Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org/md/archives.html
MOQ Online - MOQ_Discuss<http://moq.org/md/archives.html>
moq.org
Robert M. Pirsig's MoQ deals with the fundamentals of existence and provides a 
more coherent system for understanding reality than our current paradigms allow


________________________________
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org/md/archives.html

Reply via email to