[lit-ideas] Re: Sounds right to me
- From: "Phil Enns" <phil.enns@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 14:25:24 +0700
John McCreery wrote:
"If nothing else, this fragmentation makes it increasingly difficult
to reconstitute the common ground for rational discourse once provided
by liberal education."
But, according to liberalism, isn't the common ground for rational
discourse found, not in a grand unifying theory, but in the commitment
to the moral worth of human beings and the belief that it is possible
to agree on particular public projects despite disagreeing on a great
many private ones? If this is the case, then the attempt to construct
a 'common ground for rational discourse' beyond the above moral and
pragmatic 'propositions' would be anti-liberal.
I am also curious what the anthropologist in John thinks of the
propositions. The culture I currently swim in is built on ambiguity
and the rejection of economy. A good speech is one that is lengthy
with many rhetorical flourishes. Content, as I/we think of it, is
largely irrelevant since truth is not the product of propositions and
assertions. I just don't think many Javanese would be impressed with
the propositions. I wonder what John, with his anthropologists hat
on, thinks of them.
Sincerely,
Phil Enns
Lost in Java
------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
