[PREV - GRINDING_HEADS]    [TOP]

MENAND_CLUBBED


                                              January  8, 2010
                                              January 19, 2010

About Louis Menand, and
"The Metaphysical Club" (2001)

"The Metaphysical Club" is a fun read
as an entry in the sub-genre of
axe-grinding intellectual history
                                           GRINDING_HEADS

  But you don't have to look
  far to find pro-academic
  philosophers complaining
  about Menand's general
  cluelessness about what the        Susan Haack's memorable phrase,
  philosophers of pragmatism         reviewing an anthology by Menand
  were really saying.                titled "Pragmatism":

  But while it may be                "Rortyism is vulgar pragmatism;
  fun to stick it to                 this is vulgar Rortyism."
  Menand for getting
  Peirce wrong, or for                            MENAND_HAACKED
  not grasping the
  subtleties of a
  tiff between Dewey
  and William James,
  or what not, myself
  I'm a little more              In Metaphysical Club at least,
  interested in whether          Menand does not present
  Menand's pragmatism is         pragmatism as one single entity.
  pragmatically worth            There's a chapter titled
  anything.                      "Pragmatisms", and it does a
                                 compare-and-contrast of his four
                                 horsemen, who are:

                                     Oliver Wendel Holmes
                                     Charles S. Peirce
                                     William James
                                     John Dewey

                                              Leading off with Holmes
                                              is unusual, but that
                                              sort of thing doesn't
                                              bother me.

                                                       I suppose it might
                                                       be taken as a further
                                                       attempt at downplaying
                                                       the role of Peirce...

                                                          MENAND_HAACKED

  Menand spins a tale of Oliver
  Wendel Holmes as a key                This book might best be
  proto-pragmatist, forged in           taken as a kind of
  the hell of the Civil War,            historical fiction.
  where he learned the dangers
  of fanaticism, and the virtues
  of professionalism
                                        LIGHT_EXPECTATIONS
     It's dangerous to believe
     anything, you see, but it is
     good to work your ass off
     for things you don't believe in.

         Believing in something
         is bad, because people            But then, aren't people who
         who believe stuff sometimes       don't believe in anything
         do bad stuff.                     inclined to sit on their butts
                                           and let the true believers get
                                           away with murder?

                                              Menand makes fun
                  "... while the              of William James'
                  dogmatist is                vacillation-- he
                  harmful, the                would prefer a more
                  skeptic is                  resolute prophet of
                  useless."                   the irresolute?
                  -- Bertrand
                     Russell

                  LOATHING_PHILOS


         Menand's use of history is murky.
         It appears that he wants to argue that
         idealists of any stripe are bad,
         because they can turn into murderous
         fanatics.

         So then, the idea is that those
         absolute abolitionists are the
         bad guys who caused the of the
         Civil War?

         But given that Menand's account of the
         Civil War is correct, the abolitionists
         response to the threat of secession was
         "good riddance".  The source of the
         carnage of the war would then seem to be
         the unionists, not the abolitionists.

                And you know, if it weren't
                for professionalism maybe               If you're going to
                they would've all cut it                evaluate beliefs
                out sooner.                             "pragmatically"
                                                        based on their
                                                        results, then there
                                                        have to be results
                                                        you can identify as
                                                        good and bad.

                                                        Killing lots of
                                                        people would seem
                                                        to be one of those
                                                        definitely bad things.

                                                        But then slavery is
                                                        another absolute
                                                        evil...  as Menand
                                                        well knows.

          Menand never quite spells out
          what he thinks should have
          happened... what was The Right
          Thing to do in those days?

          We can sketch out some possible
          positions, and ask ourselves          IN_SUM
          "pragmatically" (or otherwise)
          which one is best.


              My preference: "Good Riddance".
              If the South didn't want in
              the Union, by what right would
              you force them to stay?             But if you were going to
                                                  pick a reason to go to
                 That, at least, settles the      war with a neighboring
                 question of slavery in the       territory "supression of
                 new territories -- presuming     slavery" would seem to
                 that the South let's them        be one of the better ones.
                 go to the Union.
                                                       You might sit back
                 It also settles the problem           and hope the South
                 of the South demanding the            found it's own way
                 return of escaped slaves.             to abolition...
                 If they can make it north,
                 they're free.  Political                Many modern
                 asylum.  (And one would                 revisionists
                 have to hope for anti-                  argue that slavery
                 immigration sentiment to                would've just
                 keep it's head down for                 withered away.
                 awhile.)
                                                         That puts quite a
                                                         burden on the slaves
                                                         of that era though:
                                                         they're stuck
                                                         while we wait for
                                                         it all to wither.


--------
[NEXT - MENAND_HAACKED]