Delight Springs

Thursday, November 12, 2020

The conversational nature of philosophy

 I'm looking forward to meeting for the second and final time tonight, on Zoom of course, with students in "MALA 6010-Communication"-the co-taught course in which I'm bringing up the rear...

My block,  & 12, is "The Conversational Nature of Philosophy"... 

NOV 5 


Recommended:

NOV 12 
Recommended:

Description. The communication of ideas, and the constructive-critical work of discussing and evaluating them, is central to the mission of philosophy, "the search for wisdom." Philosophers in America's pragmatic tradition, in particular, have emphasized the notion of philosophy as an ongoing trans-historical conversation between and among ourselves, our forebears, and future generations. In that sense, philosophy is an intrinsically pluralistic philosophy of communication. We'll read and discuss 

  • William James, who said "The pluralistic form takes for me a stronger hold on reality than any other philosophy I know of, being essentially a social philosophy, a philosophy of 'co'..." ("The Essence of Humanism," 1905)
  • Richard Rorty, who called philosophy "the conversation of mankind" and said “The world does not speak. Only we do. The world can, once we have programmed ourselves with a language, cause us to hold beliefs. But it cannot propose a language for us to speak. Only other human beings can do that." 
  • David Whyte, the philosopher/poet who speaks and writes eloquently of "the conversational nature of reality."
I've spent the morning reading and joining the discussion threads our students have generated so far. Just for the record, shorn of context, here are some of my contributions to the conversation (which I'll be sorry to see come to an end):
We mustn't conflate socialism with communism, at least not in the specific forms of authoritarian communism we know from 20th century history.

Rorty's "socialism" is Norway's. Norway and the other Scandinavian social democracies consistently top the "Happiest Nation" rankings. Those societies are redistributive and egalitarian, but they are not corrupt. Universal health care and education are paid for by high tax rates, which the people do not generally consider to be confiscatory but rather simply the cost of creating a humane and generous society. It's a different model than ours, for sure, and one that I notice my young students increasingly drawn to.

"Philosophy is keeping an open mind about the world. As a socialist you can’t do that"... I have to disagree. Some of my best friends are open-minded socialists.
==
"if you want to walk fast walk alone, if you want to walk far walk together"... I think Al Gore cited that proverb in "An Inconvenient Truth," to make the point that we CAN effectively address climate change if we "walk together"...
==
"The idea of overhearing yourself say something is a bit meditative"... What's that old line?--'I don't really know what I think 'til I see what I say.' J.K. Rowling said "Sometimes I know what I believe because of what I’ve written." Conversation (which writing is of course a species of) is thus a catalyst of self-discovery.

I agree, hearing Whyte's literal voice adds a lot to the printed text. Same for Rorty, in a different way.
--Also, as to philosophers' accessibility...
Analytic philosophers pride themselves on the clarity of their expression, but paradoxically tend to converse only among themselves. Rorty broke with the analytic tradition in calling for a more conversational approach that crosses traditional lines between analysts and "continentals" (and pragmatists). His heroes are Dewey, Wittgenstein, and Heidegger. Of those three, only Dewey is generally thought to be straightforwardly "accessible" to non-specialists (Dewey prided himself in being a "Public Philosopher"). In bringing the three of them together in his own thought and writing, Rorty was attempting to simulate a conversation that would transcend academia and shed light on our larger human history.
==
"He believes that our identities are shaped in part by the amount of attention we pay to things other than ourselves"... Indeed, perhaps in largest part. Whyte and Rorty, in their different styles, both attest the value of expanding one's sense of self by opening up to the world and others, and other "vocabularies" and "languages" etc.

I find it interesting, maybe poignant, that Rorty's regret at not having been more attuned to poetry in life is in part also a regret at not having forged deeper friendships. Perhaps his particular style of philosophical conversation was, "ironically," a barrier to the human "solidarity" he sought.
==
"Reality wants you to come out from behind yourself and the wall you have set up for yourself and start a conversation"... And "reality" in both the poet's and the philosopher's sense just IS that point of contact and engagement, isn't it, with the world and other people? Philosophical conversation in Rorty's sense is engagement with others' ideas and metaphors (etc.) combined with a recognition that our own are "contingent"... so an appropriate humility and receptivity and willingness to listen might just teach us something, might (as you say) expand our horizons.

No comments:

Post a Comment