[lit-ideas] Re: A political thought (continued)

On 2004/04/30, at 14:58, Scribe1865@xxxxxxx [quoted Mark Lilla who]  
wrote:

>  It is a moral challenge to determine how to comport
> oneself simultaneously in relation to abstract ideas and a  
> recalcitrant world.

Thanks, Eric, for posting this piece. What do you think? Would it be  
fair to say that between the Scylla of abstract ideas and the Charybis  
of constantly changing circumstance (respectively closely associated  
with what James MacGregor Burns calls the transformational and  
transactional aspects of politics), intellectuals are more prone to  
succumb to the lure of the former?

Playing with abstractions can, of course, be only a harmless glass bead  
game.  But imbued with the passions that kill, abstractions can also be  
deadly.

Which is not to say that abstract thought is useless. Muddling through  
can also be dangerous. Found the following while Googling for  
references to Scylla and Charybis.

=====
If fundamentalism is rooted in the belief that there is only one  
revealed truth, the threat that stands on the other side of the narrow  
channel humanity must navigate is nihilism - the belief that there is  
no truth at all.

If fundamentalism is the dark offspring of tradition and orthodoxy,  
nihilism is the equally dark offspring of pragmatism and relativism.  
Pragmatism, plain old common sense elevated to a formal belief - argues  
that actions can best be judged by the results they yield, not by their  
formal moral content. And relativism, in its healthy forms, is simply  
the recognition that there are a wide diversity of human cultures and  
belief systems, and that it is at the least impossible to determine  
which one is correct or divinely inspired. These are the two American  
philosophical currents that run along-side, and in competition with  
traditionalism and orthodoxy. But taken to the extreme, they lead to  
the belief that there are no intrinsic moral principals at all, that  
any outcome humans might choose is equally valid and equally moral. It  
does not, of course, follow, from the belief that there is no one fixed  
truth, that there are no falsehoods. And saying that we should take  
responsibility for the results of our actions doesn't automatically  
imply that the end justifies the means. But in the dark and powerful  
currents of human history, these currents have often led to exactly  
these results, just as orthodoxy and tradition too often lead to  
fundamentalism.

Source:  
http://www.genetics-and-society.org/resources/items/ 
20011109_pope_naral.html
======




John L. McCreery
The Word Works, Ltd.
55-13-202 Miyagaya, Nishi-ku
Yokohama, Japan 220-0006

Tel 81-45-314-9324
Email mccreery@xxxxxxx

"Making Symbols is Our Business"

------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: