[lit-ideas] Is the European version of Western Civilization doomed?
- From: "Lawrence Helm" <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2010 10:11:01 -0700
Donal,
You end up saying "life is too short" to have to paste my url into a browser in
order to read my note. I quite agree. In my case, life is too short to have
to write two notes, one for my blog and one for the technologically archaic
system that runs Lit-Ideas. I don't know why you can't click on my url. I
just checked the copy I received from Lit-Ideas and it has a clickable url.
Consequently here is my latest note, largely in response to the meat of your
note below,
http://www.lawrencehelm.com/2010/10/is-european-version-of-western.html
You say you don't see anything in the previous note that would prevent it being
posted as is on Lit-Ideas; perhaps, but I wrote many a note and tried to post
it on Lit-Ideas and had it rejected. That is major annoyance. I tried many
different approaches and ended up with the current one. I don't know why you
can't click on my urls. Are you using html?
As to my notes not being scientific, well no, no more than history is
scientific -- or "political science" is, but we all came from Phil-Lit which
was set up by David Myers. After David Myers and Andreas Ramos decided they
had irreconcilable differences and split, Myers founded Theorea and then
disappeared. Myers founded Lit-Ideas and after a decent interval disappeared.
Through all of that I wrote notes much as I do today. I am interested in the
philosophy of history rather than the history of philosophy.
Lawrence
-----Original Message-----
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Donal McEvoy
Sent: Sunday, October 17, 2010 6:51 AM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: When is it appropriate to surrender to an enemy?
--- On Sun, 17/10/10, Lawrence Helm < <mailto:lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I know I'm reneging on my resolve to post little explanations of what
> my blog-notes are about,
Where's your backbone?
> but I
> discovered that some Lit-Idears like to express as much annoyance at
> those as you do at my titles;
That might be v. little annnoyance then, as I was not even simulating
annoyance. You may have not clocked that my answer was presented mostly as a
swipe at analytical philosophy.
Your question is not a scientific one and so may in the broad sense be seen as
philosophical - more philosophical than the question "Who will likely win
today's Merseyside derby?" perhaps, but perhaps less philosophical than "Which
is the best theory of knowledge?" (yet perhaps of greater import for ethical
theory than the "Trolley Problem").
But in the way you pursue these questions, it seems they belong more on a
pol-ideol [politics-ideology] list than this (admittedly v. broad) "lit-ideas"
list. The broad question you frame could indeed be addressed in broad terms,
using examples from the dawn of human history, but my impression is that you
offer this question as a surrogate for some specific, rhetorical question such
as "Should we lay down and surrender in the face of violent Jihadism?" This
question can be answered "No" by reasonable people who nevertheless disagree on
what is the best strategy to resist and oppose violent fundamentalism of
whatever stripe: which means the question you raise surely raises this
underlying question of strategy - except for those who think we should just
"surrender".
And who does think this? I doubt you are right in suggesting Mike Geary does. I
believe I don't. But a wrongheaded strategy against violent fundamentalism can
easily only strengthen its hand (the Ireland I emerged from is replete with
examples of this). For this reason, the question in the thread-title may be
seen as not so well-put and, in fact, tendentious.
Mrs. Merkel has now come out on the failure of "multikulti" in Europe and this
view is widespread and hardening. The issue of "multi-culturalism" is a very
complex and wide-ranging one, and to say "multikulti" has failed in some
respects (that need now to be addressed more actively than before) is quite
different from saying it has not succeeded in any, or even many, respects. If
the miraculous rise of ancient Greek thought may be largely credited to a
"multi-culturalism" from the cross-pollination of ideas in their trade hubs,
then we owe our 'Western tradition' to "multikulti".
It is within, and even fundamental to, this Western tradition that within the
'private' sphere persons may behave as they wish (insofar as they do not harm
others etc.; where such 'harm' is contrary to law, it takes their behaviour
into the 'public' sphere even if occurs in the bedroom) but it is desirable
that we are all assimilated to the extent that we can interact harmoniously in
the public sphere and so cross-pollination can occur. This level of
assimilation is not conscription or uniformity in any negative sense but part
of a positive civic ethos which promotes mutual understanding. Nevertheless,
the specifics - of how we balance civic/public duty and individual freedom,
assimilation and cultural pluralism - involve a multitude of distinct if
inter-related problems. It is these that practically-speaking we need to
address rather more urgently than a question of the generality of the
subject-heading.
> Lit-Ideas format won't allow me to write my notes the way I do for my
> blog; so I would have to in order to avoid your expressions of
> annoyance.
This time I have read the blog note and don't myself see how it would
contravene any "Lit-Ideas format". It is also the case that your notes are not
posted as clickable links and need to be copied. This is when I find it often
appropriate to surrender to feelings of "Life's too short".
Donal
London
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest
on/off), visit <http://www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html>
www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
