Hook Tragic

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

  • 8/12/2019 Hook Tragic

    1/23

    Pragmatism and the Tragic Sense of LifeAuthor(s): Sidney HookReviewed work(s):Source: Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association, Vol. 33 (1959 -1960), pp. 5-26Published by: American Philosophical AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3129513.

    Accessed: 05/11/2012 20:17

    Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

    .JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

    content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

    of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

    .

    American Philosophical Associationis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to

    Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association.

    http://www.jstor.org

    http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=amphilosophicalhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3129513?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3129513?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=amphilosophical
  • 8/12/2019 Hook Tragic

    2/23

    Pragmatismnd theTragicSenseof Life*SIDNEYHOOKLast summer nHonolulu,on a Sundaywhen theEast-West hilo-sophers' onference as not nsession, madean interestingiscovery.I wandered nto a church n which after he minister eliveredhissermonthe audiencewas invited o questionhim and make criticalcomments. enjoyed t mmensely. ad I remainedn Hawaii I wouldhavebecome member fthat ongregation.or although recognizethat there re occasionswhen one shouldlisten nd not talkback,Ihaveoften uffered hencompelled ositpatientlys wavesofrhetoricorstreams foutrageousmisstatementrmisinterpretationashedoverme.My sympathyhereforeoes out to anyaudience whichmusten-durewith ilent omposurehediscussion fa controversialheme.Mysympathys tempered ythe realization hat ll ofyouhavethe meansand the ongmemories o make effectiveeplies.In casting bout for theme, consulted omeofmydistinguishedpredecessors ho toldme: "For Heaven's sake and our own, don'tmerely iveus another aper.Say somethingfgeneral ignificance"-which took to be an encouragemento talkabout argeand contro-versialmattersn an old-fashioneday.

    I."What, if anything, as philosophy o tell us about the humancondition,bout the fateofman and his works?"This question n allits changes have heardrepeatedlyn threemajor continents.t isaskedmostly yphilosophicalaymen--bytudents nd teachers ndmen of ettersn search f a center,r at least a shelter,n a worldbe-comedark and insecure ecause of theshadows oftotalitarianismndwar. It is asked at interdisciplinaryonferences;nd by academic ad-ministratorsnsearch fprojects orecommend ofoundations,rojectswhich, o use an expressionn wide use,"are notmerely ftechnicalphilosophicaloncern."

    *Presidentialddressdelivered efore he Fifty-Sixthnnual Meetingof theEasternDivision of theAmerican hilosophical ssociationt Columbia Uni-versity,ecember 8-30, 959.5

  • 8/12/2019 Hook Tragic

    3/23

    AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL ASSOCIATIONThe question:What avingmessage o philosophersring heirfellow-men?haveheard skedevenbyprofessionalhilosophers

    agonizingver he act hathey ave subjectutnoapparentubject-matter.t washeard t theXIIth nternationalongressfPhilosophyat Venice-and hereheSoviet hilosophersndertookoanswer t.It sraised eriodicallyyvoicesnthis ountrynd nourown ssocia-tion s a protestgainst nalytic hilosophy.twasthe entral hemeoftheThirdEast-Westhilosophers'onferencehere or ix weeksfortylder ndalmost smany oungerhilosophersriedo discoverwhat earing hilosophyadonsocial ractice.t onepointwe weretold o maginehatwe had the arofthe tatesmenftheworld,ndwere hallengedogive hemounseln howtoput heworld'sffairin order.No one recalled lato's xperiencet Syracuser reflecteduponthefact hat s far s we can udgetheonlyrequest ristotlemade fAlexander,henhehad hisear,was that e sendbackfreshbiologicalpecimensromAsia. ndeed,t is not ikelyhatwithhisviews bout he ssentialuperiorityf theGreeks o therest fman-kind hatAristotle ouldhavegivenhisblessingsoAlexander'sn-lightened,fpremature,ttempto establishworld ulturer that ewouldevenhave beensympathetico thepurpose f theEast-WestPhilosophers'onference.Thisquestion,ithwhich begin,scertainlylarge neandmaybe deemed n appropriateheme ordiscussionn conjunction ithJohn ewey's entenaryear.II.

    For some imenowphilosophersavebeendisputing ith achother boutwhat hilosophyhould r should otbe.Theywouldbebetterccupied,tseems ome, oing achwhathe thinkshilosophic-allyworthwhile nstead fobjectingithero linguisticnalysis rmetaphysicalpeculation,s the asemaybe.The issue s notone ofproperefinitionrevenwhetherhilosophys a sciencera body fknowledgefcomparablebjectivity,ut rather hethert is worthdoing,whetherheres sufficientlluminationnd fun n pursuingcertainhemes,gnoredyothers,o ustifyontnuingodo so. Afterall noonereallyelieveshat nly ciences a self-justifyingnterprise.But ince he ubject asbecomemoot nd since here asdevelopedwide oncernboutwhat,fanything,hilosophyas tosayofgeneralhumanoncern,ome emarksboutt are norder.As some fyou re ware, haveformany earsoncernedyselfwithproblems f social and political nd legalphilosophy, ith prob-6

  • 8/12/2019 Hook Tragic

    4/23

    PRAGMATISM AND THE TRAGIC SENSE OF LIFElemsof men"as authentics anyof thoserecognized ythinkers howould reformmodernphilosophy. ut I findmyselfncreasinglyutof sympathy ith thosewho have impugned hewholephilosophicalenterpriseecause of its failure o serve as a beacon to mankind ndistress.When I askmyselfwhy feelunconfortablend at oddswiththosewho attackphilosophers ecausetheyhave nothing f immedi-ate,practicalmoment o say, find hatmyconception fphilosophyalthough tated ometimesn words similar o theirs, iffersn impor-tantways.Put most uccinctly,lthough believe hatphilosophys aquestforwisdom,manyofthosewho cite thisphrase, oo,speakandactas ifthey lreadyhad it.The difference aybe onlyof nuanceandemphasisbut it has a profound earingon one's conception f theappropriateoleofthephilosophern theculture fhistime. t is thedifferenceetween einga moralist nd beinga moralizer. he moral-izermaybe called"theshoutingmoralist,"fwhomSantayana ome-where aysthathe "no doubthas his placebutnot in philosophy."tis a difference,n theone hand,between nalyzing pecfiicnd basicsocialproblems nd conflicts,nd clarifyinghe ssues n disputewithall thetoolsat one's command--and, n theother, roclaimingolu-tions nd programsn thebasis ofantecedentommitments hichoneshareswith omefaction fhisfellow-men.t is thedifferenceetweenapproaching roblems fhumanexperiencen terms f one'svocationas a philosopher,hich stodo intellectualustice othevaried ndcon-flictingnterestsresent r discovered,nd one's vocation s a citizenlimitedby specific uties he mustfulfill. t is the differenceetweenintellectualoncernwhichmayor maynot ead to programs factionand commitmento programs f actionwhichby theirverynatureestops elf-criticalhought.In thecourseof itshistoryhilosophy as beenmanythings. utitsdistinctiveoncern tall timeshasbeen thequestforwisdom.Other-wise therewould be no point n including hinkersikeDescartesorLeibnitz nthehistoryfphilosophynaddition o thehistoryfscienceormathematics. hatdistinguisheshephilosophers a moralist romthephilosophers a mathematician,ogicianor natural cientist,ndfrom heordinarymanas a philosopher,s his sustained eflectiveur-suit ofwisdom.This meanstwo things.The systematictudyof theknowledgewhich s relevant owisdom:and theanalysis fthecom-mitments e assume ndruleoutwhenknowledges related opolicy.All of us know thatwisdomand knowledge re notthe same thingbutwe sometimesmistakenlypeakas ifthey reopposed.A manmayhaveknowledge fmany hings ndnotbewisebut a wisemancannot

    7

  • 8/12/2019 Hook Tragic

    5/23

    AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL ASSOCIATIONbe ignorantfthethings e is wise about.He musthaveknowledge fthenature ndcareer fvalues nhumanexperience; nowledge fthenature ndhistoryf the situationsnwhich hey evelop nd conflict;knowledge ftheminds nd emotions f the carriers fvalue; knowl-edgeof theconsequences f actions akenorproposed.The wise manis notonewhomerely ecitesmoralprinciplesndapplies ready-madeschedule f moralobligationso theproblemsnd perplexitiesfvalueconflict. e is one who on thebasisofwhat he alreadyknows, r be-lieveshe knows,makes freshnquiryntothe situationswhich definealternativesnd exact theircosts."Only the conventional nd thefanatical,"bserves ewey,"are always mmediatelyure ofright ndwrong n conduct." his means that philosophermustearnhis titleto be wisenotby right fphilosophicalradition r philology utbythe hardworkofacquiring elevant nowledge nd byhardthinkingabout t.Here lie importantasksforthephilosopher. o be wise he mustimmerse imselfn the actualsubjectmattersnot necessarilyxperi-ences) out of which ife'sproblems rise.To be wise about economicaffairs e must tudy conomics,o be wise aboutproblems f law hemuststudy aw, to be wise aboutpoliticshe muststudyhistory,o-ciology nd other isciplines. o be wiseaboutwarand peacehe muststudymilitary echnologynd thetheorynd practice f communismincluding tsstrategicxploitationf peacemovementso disarmthefree world. ndeed,thesesubjects re so interrelatedhat to be wiseaboutanyone of themhe must tudy hem ll. And I might dd, inview of some currentwriting, o be wise about education t is notenoughmerelyorebaptize heendsofthegood life s endsof a goodeducation, oo, as if without perational pplication o concretehis-torical ituations,heyhad anybuta peripheral earingon thegreat,current roblems f education.One must tudy ocialhistory,hepsy-chology f earning,hemethods ndtechniquesfpedagogy o achieveeducationalwisdom.To enumerate he ends of thegood life is notenough.Nor is a primer n logical nalysiswhich an serve s an intro-ductionto the studyof any subject, primerto a philosophy feducation.All of theseproblems re of tremendous omplexity ecauseofthe number findependentariables hey ontain, ecausetheyrarelypermitof controlled xperiment,nd because the communitymustsometimesct upon them n desperate rgency efore he analysis scomplete. his should makeforhumility mongphilosophersven astheybring o thestudy f theseproblems hemethodologicalophisti-8

  • 8/12/2019 Hook Tragic

    6/23

    PRAGMATISM AND THE TRAGIC SENSE OF LIFEcation, he artsand skillsofanalysiswhichare thehallmarks f theirprofession.his is what meanby"theproblems f men." It is phi-losophynotas a questfor alvation ut as a pursuit funderstandingofgreat ulturalssues nd their ossibleupshot. t does not start roma complete tockofphilosophicalwisdomwhich t dispenses o otherswithhortatoryerver ut with an initial enseof concern o meetthechallengeof the great unresolvedproblemsof our time,offeringanalysis f theseproblemswhich will win therespect f thespecialistand yetcommandthe attention f everyman, .g. how to preservepeaceand freedom,chieve dequate productionnd meaningfuloca-tions forall, designpatterns f creative eisure, ffect esegrationfpossiblewithout oercion,stablish welfare tate nd a spirit fenter-prise, reserve ational ecuritynd theright odissent.t isphilosophyas normativeocial inquiry.And it is not social reform. ow couldphilosophy e identified ith ocial reformn view of the existence fmanyesteemed hilosophersromAristotle o Santayanawhose udg-mentsof wisdomwere conservative,ostile to social reform? uchidentificationouldbe comparable o defining physicists one whowas committedo a specific ypothesisn physics.At thispointmy nner ar sensesunspokenmurmurs fsurprise."Surely,"omeofyoumustbe saying,this onstitutesrepudiationfJohnDewey'sconceptionfphilosophy,or, fter ll,does notDeweycall upon philosopherss philosopherso do preciselywhat is beingurgedthey houldnotdo? Does notDewey call uponphilosophersoplaytheroleofsocialreformers?" y answer s: "Not as I understandhimandnotas he is tobeunderstoodnthe ight fall he haswritten."Here is nottheplacetoprovide hedocumentation.contentmy-selfmerelywithsaying hatDewey has a very omplex onception fphilosophy.hilosophys indeedconcerned rimarily ithwhat I callnormativeroblems fsocial nquiry. utitsfunctions alsotoprovideleading, peculativedeas in science-natural nd social.And a thirdfunctions toweavetogetherertain amilies f deas nto philosophi-cal synthesis.There is a kind of music of ideas," he says,"whichappeals, apart fromany question of verification,o the mind ofthinkers "Nor is thisall. The philosophermustbring omeperspec-tiveorvision obearupontheworldwhich s related o issuesofvalueand hencemakestheanalysis fnormative roblems fsocialinquirymoresensitive."Philosophies," eclaresDewey,"are differentaysofconstruingife.... "There is more,then, hanproblems f normative ocial inquirywhichfallswithin heprovince fthephilosopher'soncern. here is9

  • 8/12/2019 Hook Tragic

    7/23

    AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL ASSOCIATIONthe illuminating erspectiven whichtheyare seen which is meta-physics. If philosophy e criticism,"ewey asks in Experience ndNature,"what is to be said of the relationof philosophy o meta-physics?"His answerbrieflys thatmetaphysicss a descriptionfthosegrossfeatures ftheworldwhichconstitutehebackdrop fthetheatre f humanactivity gainstwhich menplayouttheir ives.Theconductof life and the analysisof its problems, owever ndirectly,will reflect hat we believeto be thegenericfeatures f human ex-periencen the world. n this ense, s ultimatelyelated o the humanscene and the adventure f human life,but not to ontology,meta-physicss "a groundmap of theprovince f criticismstablishingaselines to be employedn more ntricateriangulations."This bringsmefinallyomytheme fthetragic enseoflifeas afeature f humanexperiencewhichprovides n illuminating erspec-tive upon the analysisof man's problems.The juxaposition f theexpressionspragmatism"nd "thetragic enseof ife"may appearbe-wildering othosewho understandragmatisms a narrow heory fmeaningand "the tragic ense of life" as the hystericalament thatmanisnot mmortal-the heme ongof Unamuno'sbookofthat itle.To speakofpragmatismnd thetragic enseof life s somewhatikespeakingof "The Buddhismof JohnDewey" or "The Dewey No-bodyKnows."I am not aware thatDewey everused thephrase thetragic enseof life"butI know thatgrowingup in theshadow of the CivilWar,he feltwhat shall describe y t and that t is implied n his accountof moralexperience.At any ratenothing f momentdepends uponwhetherheview s actually ewey'sorHegel's or WilliamJames' rNicolai Hartmann'sn all of whom t can be found. taketheresponsi-bility f the nterpretationnd itsapplication.t is a perspective hichseemsto me to illumine hepragmatic iew thatproblems f norma-tive social inquiry-morals n the broad sense-are theprimary-notexclusive-subjectmatter f philosophy,nd that reasonor scientificintelligencean and shouldbe usedto resolve hem.By thetragic enseof life do not understandmerely ensitivityto thepresence f evil or sufferingn the worldalthough ll tragicsituationso somedegree nvolveone or theother.And since havementioned uddha I should ike to saythat thepresence f theevilsin the worldwhich ed Buddhato surrenderisKingdom n order oseek salvationforhimself nd mankind are not to me the realitiesfundamentalo the tragic ense of life. There were threethings nBuddha'sexperience,eflectionponwhich ed himto a renunciation10

  • 8/12/2019 Hook Tragic

    8/23

    PRAGMATISM AND THE TRAGIC SENSE OF LIFEofhisprincelyot and a questfor iberation romdesire nd incarnateexistence-sickness,ld age and death. One can verywell understandwhy n the world n whichhe livedand formanycenturieshereafteruntilourown,thesephenomenaoomedso large n theover-populatedandpoverty-strickenreasof Asia.Nonethelessf we aretodistinguishbetween hesense of thepitiful nd the senseof thetragic-sickness,old age and evenmanyforms f death,despite heirnumbing ffectuponhuman ensibility,re notnecessarilyo be classified s tragic.First,giventherapidly xpandinghorizonsofknowledge n ourage, there s nothingn thenatureof thingswhichrequires hatthesick,any morethan the poor,mustalwaysbe withus. If scientificmedicinedevelops t thesamepace in thenext few hundredyears sithas in the astcentury,t is notshallowoptimism o anticipatehatthemost serious orms f sicknesswill disappear nd notbe replacedby others.Even where sickness s present t may be the occasionof tragedy utby itselfs not an illustration f it. In relation o theforces f natureman's lot may appearpitiful. he tragic s a moralphenomenon.What is trueof sickness s true of old age. The aged arouseourcompassionbecause of theirfeebleness nd fragility-andthe mul-tiplicityf theiraches and pains.When these are absent-and this,too, s a concern f scientific edicine-there s a chanceforserenity,wisdomand beautyof spirit o manifest hemselves. here is some-times grandeurnd statelinessbout an old treewhichaged personsdo notpossessbecausetheprocesses fphysical egeneration,nd theconsequentweakeningof thevitalpowers,make man pitiful. hereis no tragedyngrowing ld biologicallyutonlysorrow; heelementof thetragic nters n thedefeat f plansor hopes, n therealizationthat n muchgrief here s not muchwisdom,and that we cannotcountmerely ponthepassageof time lonetodiminish urstupiditiesand cruelties.But what of death-Buddha's third ppallingdiscovery-preoccu-pationwithwhichhasbecome o fashionableoday mongsome Euro-pean existentialisthilosophershat heir hilosophyeemsto be morea meditation pon deaththanupon life? Is not death the ultimatesource fwhatevers tragic n life? cannotbringmyselfo think o.Nor can I convincemyselfhat tsnature nd significancen lifewaitedto be discovered y Kierkegaardand Heideggerand theirmoderndisciples.It is thereflectivettitude owardsdeathnot thepopularattitudeortheone displayed y those n its astagonies,whichthrows ight n

    11

  • 8/12/2019 Hook Tragic

    9/23

    AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL ASSOCIATIONitsnature ndplace n life.The attitudexhibited ySocratesnfacingit seems wiserthanthatexpressed y the contemnorsf therationallifewho not contentwithtalking bout what theyfindwhen theylook into themselves nflate t into a universal raitof the humanpsyche. o Tolstoywho is quotedbyexistentialistriters, rites: If aman has learned o think, o matterwhathe maythink bout,he isalwaysthinkingf hisown death.All philosophersre like that.Andwhattruth an therebe, if there s death?"Logically, f course, hismakesno more sensethanthe even more extreme tatementf Sartrethat ifwemustdie then ur ifehasnomeaning,"which o thosewhosolvesomeproblemsn life and thereforeind omemeaning,mightbe taken s a premisen a new short roof f human mmortality.llthis t seems omeexpressesittlemore han fear fdeath nd a crav-ing for mmortality.t is a commonplace bservation,owever, hatmost humanbeingswho desire mmortalityesirenot unending ifebutunendingyouth r otherdesirable ualitieswhich ifemakespos-sible.The fable fJuno ndher over n whichJuno etitionsheGodsto takeback thegift f eternal ifetheyhad conferredpon a mortalindicates hatthe Greeks knew thata life without nd could be adubiousblessing. n thisrespect he Hellenes were wiser than theHebrewswhoseGod drivesAdam fromParadiseafterhe had eatenofthefruit fthetree fknowledge oprevent imfrom ating fthefruit fthetreeofeternal ife:Agonyoverdeath strikesme as one oftheunloveliesteatures f the ntellectualife fourphilosophicimes-and certainly nworthyf anyphilosophywhichconceives tself s aquestforwisdom. t has neverbeen clearto me whythosewho arenauseatedbylife,notbythisor thatkindof lifebutanykindof life,shouldbe so fearfulfdeath.Wisdom is knowledge f theusesof lifeand death.The uses oflife are to be found n the consummatoryxperiences f visionanddelight, f love,understanding,rt,friendshipnd creative ctivity.That is why n a contingent orldof finitemen,vulnerableopowersthey annotcontrolwhich sometimes obsthemof thepossibilityfany ustifyingonsummations,eathhas itsuses,too.For it givesussomeassurance hatno evilorsufferingastsforever.o anyone wareof the multitudef infamies nd injusticeswhichmenhave endured,of the brokenbodiesand torturedmindsofthevictims f these ruel-ties, fthemultiple imensionsfpain in whichmillions ifeon mat-tress raves rwithminds hroudedndarkness,eathmust ometimesappearas a beneficenteleasenotan inconsolableffliction.t washesthe earth leanofwhatcannotbe cleansed n anyotherway.Not all

    12

  • 8/12/2019 Hook Tragic

    10/23

    PRAGMATISM AND THE TRAGIC SENSE OF LIFEthebright romises f a future reeof thesestainsof horror an re-deembyone iotathe otofthosewho willnot iveto see thedawnofthenewday.It is noblerto exist nd strugglen a world n whichthere s al-waysa vitaloption o liveor die. The fearofdeath, he desire o sur-viveat anycost or price n humandegradation, as been thegreatestallyoftyranny,astand present.There are times," aysWoodbridge,"whena manoughttobe moreafraid f livingthandying."And wemay add, thereare situationsn which because of the conditions fsurvival, heworstthingwe can know of anyone s thathe has sur-vived. We have known such timesand situations. hey may comeagain.Even in a world in which all injustices, ruelties nd physicalanguishhavedisappeared,hepossibilityfwithdrawingrom tmakesthe world nsofar orth betternd a freerworld. o longas we retainpossession f ourfaculties,urdecision o remain nthe world ndicatesa participatingesponsibilityn our partforthose eventswithin twhichourcontinuanceffects.fhumanbeingswereunableto die theywouldtothat xtent e unfree.Man shares conatus ui essepersevarewitheverythinglse in theworld or at least with all other entientbeings.But justbecause he can on rational roundsgive up hisbeing,choosenot to be, he differentiatesimselfmoststrikinglyromhisfellowcreatures n nature. concludethereforehatdeath as such isnot a tragic henomenonndthat tspresence oesnotmake theworldand ourexperiencewithin t tragic. t would be truer o call tragicworld nwhichmenwanted odiebut couldn't.What,then,do I meanbythetragic enseof lifeand whatis itsrelevance o pragmatism? mean by the tragic ensea verysimplethingwhich s rooted n theverynatureof themoralexperiencendthephenomenon fmoralchoice.Everygenuineexperience fmoraldoubtand perplexityn whichwe ask: "What should I do?" takesplace n a situationwheregoodconflicts ithgood. fwe alreadyknowwhat s evil themoral nquiry s over,or itneverreallybegins. Theworse or evil,"saysDewey,"is therejected ood" but until we rejectit,thesituations one in whichapparent ood opposes pparent ood."All theseriousperplexitiesf lifecomebackto thegenuinedifficultyofforming judgment s to thevalues ofa situation: hey omebackto a conflict fgoods."No matter owwe resolve heoppositionomegood will be sacrificed,ome interest, hose immediate ravingforsatisfaction aybe everywhitas intense nd authentic s itsfellows,will be modified, rustratedr even suppressed.Where thegoods in-13

  • 8/12/2019 Hook Tragic

    11/23

    AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL ASSOCIATIONvolved re of a relativelyow order, ikedecisions bout what to eat,whereto live,whereto go, the choice s unimportantxceptto themindofa child.Therearesmalltragediess there resmalldeaths.Atanylevelthe conflictfvaluesmustbecomemomentouso oneself rothers oconvey dequately hetragic uality.Wherethechoice s be-tweengoods that are complex n structurend consequential orthefuture,hetragic ualityof the moraldilemmaemergesmoreclearly.And when it involvesbasic choicesof love,friendship,ocations, hequalitybecomespoignant. he verynature ftheselfas expressednhabits, ispositionsnd characters to someextent ltered ythesede-cisions. f,as Hobbes observes,Hell is truth eentoo late,"all of usmust ive n it. No matter ow justifiedn smugretrospecturmoraldecisions eem to havebeen, nly heunimaginative ill failto seethepossible elveswe have sacrificedo becomewhatwe are. Grantthatall regretsrevain,that nyother hoicewouldhavebeenequallyormoreregretted,heselveswe mighthavebeen are eloquentwitnessesofvalueswe failed to enjoy. f we haveplayed t safeand made ourexistencepparentlyecure, hefascinatingxperience f a lifeof ad-venturendexperiencean neverbe ours, nd every houghtfa goodfightmissedwillbe accompanied ya pang. t is a poorspiritWilliamJames eminds s who doesnotsensethechagrin f thetardyCrillon,who arrivingwhen the battle s over s greeted yHenry V withthewords:"Hang yourself,raveCrillon We fought t Arques, nd youwerenot there "On the otherhand, fwe have scorned o putdownour roots,huggedour liberty ightlyo ourselves y refusingo givehostages o fortune, ecomecrusaders r martyrsor ostcauses,wehavethrust rom urselves he warmth fsustained ffection,nd thecomfortingegularities hichcan bestheal thebruised pirit.

    There is a conflict ot onlybetween hegood and thegood butbetween hegood and therightwherethegood is a generic ermforall thevalues n a situationnd theright or all theobligations. heconcepts f good and right re irreducibleo each other n ordinaryuse.We areoften onvincedwe mustfulfill certain uty venwhenwe are farfrom onvinced o thesamedegreethattheaction or therule texemplifies illachieve hegreatest ood.The "good"is relatedto thereflectiveatisfactionfan interest:theright" o thefulfillmentof a bindingdemandor rule of the community.here is no moralproblemwhen n doingtheright hingwe can see that t also leads tothegreatestoodorwhen trivingor hegreatestoodconformsooursenseofwhat s right. ut theacuteethical roblemsrisewhen n thepursuit fthegoodwe do thingswhich ppearnot to be right,s e.g.,14

  • 8/12/2019 Hook Tragic

    12/23

    PRAGMATISM AND THE TRAGIC SENSE OF LIFEwhen n order oavoid thedangers f wara nationrepudiateststreatyobligationsr when norder owina warnon-combatantsrepunishedwho are n noway responsibleor heactions f others. heyalsoarisewhen in doingwhat is right ur actionsresult n evil consequences,as e.g.,when a dangerous riminal,etfree n a legaltechnicality,illsagain or when the refusal o surrender o the unjustclaimsof anaggressor esultsn wholesale laughter.Manyhavebeen theattemptsmade to escape the antinomies etween the right nd the good bydefininghegoodas theobject fright r therightmerelys themeansto thegood.All havefailed.To actupontherightno matterwhat tsconsequences orhuman weal or woe seems nhuman, t times nsane.The thirstorrighteousnessas toooften eenan angry hirstatisfiedifat all bylong draughts f blood.On theotherhand,theattemptodo good by any means no matterhow unjust, s subhumanandusually rrational.As comparedto traditional thicaldoctrines,deal utilitarianismreachesfarthestn ourquestfor an adequateethicsbut in the end it,too,mustbe rejected. nd itwas thepragmatistnd pluralist,WilliamJames, ong beforePritchard nd Ross, who indicatedwhy in thefamousquestionhe asked: "If the hypothesiswere offered s of aworld in whichMessrs.Fourier'sand Bellamy's nd Morris'Utopiashouldall be outdone, nd millions e keptpermanentlyappyon theone simplecondition hata certain ost soul on the faroffedge ofthings hould ead a lifeoflonely orture, hatexcept specificalndindependentortofemotion an itbe which wouldmake us immedi-atelyfeel . . . how hideous a thingwould be its enjoymentwhendeliberatelyccepted s thefruit f such a bargain?"The situationsunaltered fwe recognize hat here re othergoodsbesideshappinessand that ustice s itself good,because n that ase theconflictreaksoutagainbetween ood and good. In thisconnection would venturethe statementhat t is thefailure o see the radicalpluralismn thenature of the goods whichare reckoned n the consequences f anactionwhich ccounts othforMoore's view that t is self-evidenthatit canneverbe right nowinglyoapprove n actionthatwould maketheworld s a wholeworse han omealternativection nd forKant'sview thatthere re somedutiesthat t would alwaysbe right o per-form, ven f theconsequences ftheactionresulted n a worseworldor in no worldat all. No specific ule can be laid down as absolutelybinding n advanceeitherway.Nothingcan taketheplace of intelli-gence;thebetter rthe esser vil n eachsituation an be bestdefinedas theobject freflectivehoice.Even thedecision n the stock llustra-

    15

  • 8/12/2019 Hook Tragic

    13/23

    AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL ASSOCIATIONtionofthetext-bookshetheroexecute n innocentman orturnhimovertobe torturedn order o savethecommunityromdestruction-would depend upon a complexof circumstances.t is perfectlyon-ceivable hat n unjust ct will sometimes roduce hegreater ood orthe esser vil. t is sometimesecessaryo burndown a house to save avillage.Althoughwhen applied to human beings the logic seemsdamnable,few are prepared o take the positionof Kant in thoseagonizingmoral predicamentshat are not uncommon n history,especially hehistoryfoppressedminorityeoples,n which the sur-vivalofthegroup an bepurchased nly tthepriceofthepain,degra-dation nd deathofthe nnocent. o matter owwe choose,we musteither etrayhe deal of thegreater oodor the deal ofright r ustice.In this ies theagony f thechoice.Manyhavebeentheattemptso escapetheguiltof thatchoice.cite one from hepast.Duringthe MiddleAges,Maimonideswritingon the Laws ofthe Torah to guidehis peoplediscusseswhata com-munitys to do when t sbesetbyenemieswhodemand he ifeofoneman withthe threat o kill all of he be not turnedover to them.Maimonides eaches hat hey re to refuse o turn veranyman evenif all mustdie inconsequence, xceptftheir nemies all out thenameofa specific erson. had heardthisteaching efended n thegroundthat fthecommunitytself ad tomake the decisionwhowas to die,it would be takingtheguiltof an innocentman's deathupon itself,which s impermissable.ut if theenemynamestheman,thenhe canbe turned ver becausetheguiltand sin fall now on theirheads.Bythis miserable vasion t was thought hatthe tragic hoicecould beavoided. But it turnsout thatMaimonideshas been misread.WhatMaimonides eally aught s thatonly fthename of thepersonwhohas beencalled out is ofone alreadyunderthedeathsentence orhiscrimes houldhebe surrendered.utnever n innocentman."Never,"however,s a longtime. t is problematic hetherheJewswouldhavesurvivedftheyhad always bidedbyMaimonides'njunction.If anything, umanbeingsare morereadily nclinedto sacrificetheright o thegood than thegood to theright speciallyn revolu-tionaryituations hichhavedeveloped ecauseofgrievancesoolongunmet. t can easilybe shownthat t was Lenin'sconception fCom-munist thicswhich mplicitlyefined heright ction s consistingndoing anything-literallynything hatwould bringvictoryn theclass truggle-whichxplains hetransformationf a wholegenerationofidealistsntohangmen.n fact hehealth f therevolution hetherinthetimes fRobespierrer Castronever eally equires heholocaust16

  • 8/12/2019 Hook Tragic

    14/23

    PRAGMATISMAND THE TRAGIC SENSE OF LIFEof victims ffered p to it. But no revolutionncluding ur own haseverbeen achievedwithoutnjustice o someone.Howevertheconflictbetween heprinciplesfright nd the valuesofgood be theoreticallyresolved,n every oncrete ituation t leads to some abridgementfprinciple r some diminuation fvalue.The mostdramatic f all moralconflictss notbetween ood andgood,orbetween oodand right, ut between ight nd right. his inits starkest orm s the themeofSophocleantragedy ut theprimarylocus of thetragic ituations not n a playbut n life, n law,and inhistory.nnocence n personalmatters onsistsn overlookinghecon-flict f moralduties and obligations.nnocence n politicalmatters,thecharacteristicf ritualisticiberalism,onsistsn failing o see theconflictsfrightsnourBill ofRights nd thenecessityftheirntelli-gentadjustment.n our own countrywe have witnessed gain andagain theantinomyfrights evealed n divided oyalties,n thecon-flict etween llegiance o the aws ofthe state nd allegiance o whatis calleddivine aw ornatural aw or thedictates f conscience. n theinternationalceneit is expressedn the conflict f incompatible a-tionalclaims, achwith omemeasure f ustification,s in the sraeli-Arab impasse.One ofthenoteworthyeaturesfmoral ntuitionisms illustratedin thedoctrines fRoss is thisrecognitionhatprimafacieduties on-flict nd that verymportantmoral ctexhibits t thesametime har-acteristics hich end omake tbothprimafacieright ndprimafaciewrong o that lthoughwemayclaimcertaintybout theseprimafacieduties, nyparticularmoral udgment raction s atbestonlyprobableor contingent. s Ross says,"There is thereforemuch truth n thedescriptionftheright ct as a fortunatect."Fromthis heconclusionto be drawn, t seems to me ,is that themost mportant rimafaciedutyofall in a situation equiringmoraldecision s thatof conscien-tiousness, r reflectivessessment f all the relevant actorsnvolved,and thesearchingxplorationfourownhearts odetermine hat wesincerely ant,whether e reallywishto do what srightn a situationortogetourownschemingwaycomewhatmay.As much fnotmoreevil results rom onfusion f ourpurposes nd ignorance f our mo-tivesthan fromruthless nd clear-eyed esolveto ignoreeveryone'sinterestsutone'sown. This emphasis n the mportancefreflectiveinquiryntothefeatures fthesituationwhichbear on therightnessfan action eemstome to be more mportanthanRoss' conceptionrinterpretationf the ntuitivepprehensionf ourprimafacieduties.It is easier odoubt hatwe havethisfacultyf nfalliblentuitionhan17

  • 8/12/2019 Hook Tragic

    15/23

    AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL ASSOCIATIONthat ur ntelligenceasthepower o discover ur conflictsndmediatebetween hem.

    Irony s compoundedwithtragedyn the fact thatmanyof therightswe presentlynjoywe owe to our ancestorswho in theprocessofwinning hem orusdeprived thers ftheir ights.n someregionsofthe worldtheverygroundon whichpeoplestandwas expropriatedby force nd fraudfromothersby theirancestors. et as a rule itwould be a new injustice o seek to redress heoriginal njusticebydepriving hoseof theirpossessionswho hold present itle to them.Every ustdemand forreparationsgainst n aggressorountrys anunjustdemandon the descendantsf itscitizenswho as infantswerenotresponsibleorthedeedsofaggression. hat is why historys thearenaoftheprofoundest oral onflictsnwhich ome egitimate ighthas alwaysbeensacrificed,ometimesn the altars ftheGod ofWar.The Christian nd especially heBuddhist thics fpuritywhichseeks to transcend hisconflictnd avoid guiltby refusal o violateanyone's ightn suchsituations,an onlydo so bywithdrawingromtheplaneoftheethical ltogether.his maysucceed n God's eyesbutnotin man's.The Buddhist aintor anyotherwho outofrespect ortheright olife fmanorbeastrefusesver o useforce,r tokill, venwhenthis s theonlymethod, s it sometimess,thatwill savemulti-tudes fromsufferingnd death,makes himself esponsible or thegreatervil, ll the more o becausehe claimsto be acting utof com-passion.He cannot voidguiltwhetherwe regardhimas more thanmanor ess hanman.No more hanwedoesheescape he ragic ecision.There are threegeneric pproaches o thetragic onflictsf life.The firstpproach s thatofhistory.he second s thatof love.Thethird s thatof creativentelligencen quest forways of mediationwhich callhere hepragmatic.The approach fhistorys best ypifiedyHegel preciselyecausehe tries oputa glossofreason vertheterribleventswhich onstituteso muchof thehistorical rocess. ts upshot s woefullyneptto itsintent. t suggests otonlythatwhatever ausewins and however twins, smore ustthanthecausewhich s defeated,ut that he oser sthemorewicked ndnotmerelyheweaker. urther,t calls ntoques-tionthevery act ftragic onflictromwhich t so perceptivelytarts.No onehasseenmoreprofoundlynto henature f thetragic ituationthanHegel and its starkclash of equally legitimate ights.But hissolution, xpressed n Schiller'sdictumDie Weltgeschichtest dasWeltgericht,s Hegel develops t,makesthephilosophyf historytheodicy.t therebyulgarizes ragedy. or itattemptso consoleman18

  • 8/12/2019 Hook Tragic

    16/23

    PRAGMATISM AND THE TRAGIC SENSE OF LIFEwith a dialectical roof hathis agonyand defeat re notreally vilsbutnecessarylementsn thegoodnessof the whole.The position sessentiallyeligious.No monotheisticeligionwhich conceives fGodas bothomnipotentnd benevolent,o metaphysics hichasserts hatthe world is rational,necessarynd good has any roomforgenuinetragedy.The approach f ove s incompletendambiguous.t is incompletebecause f love is morethan a feeling f diffusedympathyut is ex-pressed n actionno man can love everyone r identify imselfwitheverynterest.mpiricallyovehasproduced s muchdisunitys unityintheworld--not nly nTroybut nJerusalem.njustices often ornof love,not onlyof self-love ut of love of some rather hanothers.Love is notonly ncomplete ut ambiguous.There are variouskindsof love and the actions o whichthey ead maybe incompatible. norderof distinctions required.A man's love forhis familymust bediscriminatory:is love ofmankindnot.He cannot ove both n thesame way withoutdenying ne or the other.The qualityof love isalteredwiththerangeof itsgeneralization.n one sense ove alwaysshowsa bias which reinforcesome conflictingnterest;n another tgivesall conflictingalues itsblessingwithoutndicating nyspecificmode ofactionbywhich conflictan be mediated. ove mayenableapersonto live with theburdenof guiltwhich he assumes when hesacrificesneright oanother. ut it s no guidetosocial conflicts thelast two thousandyearshave shown. Because the Lord loves manequallynothing ollows ogically bout theequality fman before heLaw. "The Agape qualityoflove," aysTillich, seesman as God seeshim."But whatmancantellus how God sees man? "Agape,"continuesTillich,"lovesin everybodynd through verybodyove itself."KarlBarthspeaksmoresimply nd intelligibly,nd witha basicbrutalitywhich s theclue tohiscrudeneutralism,henhe claims hat uch ovehas no bearingwhatever or the organization f any humansociety.Finallythere s themethod fcreativentelligence.t, too,tries omake it possibleformento livewith thetragic onflictfgoods andrightsndduties, omediatenotbyarbitraryiat utthroughnformedand responsibleecision.Whoeveruses thismethodmustfindhiswayamongall theconflictinglaims.He must thereforeive each one ofthemand the interestst representsongueor voice.Everyclaimantthereforeas a right obe heard.The hopeis that s much as possibleofeach claimmaybe incorporatedn some nclusive r shared nterestwhich s acceptedbecausethealternativesre lesssatisfactory.o thisendwe investigatevery elevant eaturebout t,the conditions nder

    19

  • 8/12/2019 Hook Tragic

    17/23

    AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL ASSOCIATIONwhich t emerged,tsproximate ausesand consequences,he costsofgratifyingt,theavailable lternativesnd their osts.Everymediationentails ome sacrifice.he questfortheunique good ofthesituation,forwhat s to be done here ndnow,maypoint owhat s better hananythinglse availablebutwhat tpoints o is also a lesser vil. t is alesser vil whether ound n a compromiser in moderatinghe de-mand of a justclaimor in learning o livepeacefully ithone's differ-enceson thesame generalprinciplewhich tells us that a divorce sbetter or ll parties oncerned hana murder. n every ase therules,thewisdom, he essons f thepastaretobe appliedbuttheyhavepre-sumptive, otfinal,validity ecausetheymaybe challengedby newpresumptions.The pragmaticmport f the logic of individualizedsituations,"ays Dewey, "is to transferhe attention f theory rompre-occupationithgeneral onceptionso theproblem fdevelopingeffective ethods f inquiry," nd applying hem. t is a logicwhichdoes notpreach olutions ut explores he suggestionswhichemergefrom heanalyses fproblems.ts categoricalmperatives to inquire,toreason ogether,o seek nevery risis he creative evices nd inven-tions hatwill notonlymake ifefullernd richer uttragedy earable.William Jamesmakes essentiallyhe same point as Dewey in thelangaugeof ideals. Since in thestruggles etween deals"victorynddefeat heremustbe,thevictoryo be philosophicallyrayed or s thatofthe more nclusive ide--of he sidewhicheven in thehour of tri-umphwill to somedegreedo justiceto the ideals in whichthevan-quished interestsay. . . ." But prayer s not enough.He goes on:"Inventsome mannerof realizingyourown ideals whichwill alsosatisfyhe aliendemands-that nd thatonly s thepathofpeace."Towhichwe must dd,provided here s a reciprocalwillto peace in thematter. ndeventhen,your wnor thealiendemands r bothmustbecurtailed.As youmayhavegathered ythistime, have beenconcernedoshowthat hispragmatic pproach o themoralproblem an notonlybe squaredwith therecognitionf tragic onflicts,f troubles,minorandgrave,whichdogthe ifeofmanin a precariousworld, ut that tgetsits chief ustificationromthisrecognition.ntelligencemay beoptimistic hen tdealswith hecontrol fthings ut themoral ifebyits verynatureforbids he levity nd superficialityhichhas oftenbeenattributedo thepragmaticpproach yitsunimaginativeritics.Indeed make boldtoclaim hat hepragmaticpproach otragedyis moreserious, venmoreheroic, hananyother pproachbecause tdoesn't esigntself othebarefact ftragedyr takeeasywaysoutat20

  • 8/12/2019 Hook Tragic

    18/23

    PRAGMATISMAND THE TRAGIC SENSE OF LIFEthepriceof truth.Wheredeathdoesnot result rom hetragic itua-tion, here realwaysconsequences or ontinuedivingwhich ttakesresponsibly ithout ielding odespair. t does not conceive ftragedyas a pre-ordainedoom,butas one in whichtheplotto someextentdependsupon us, so thatwe becomethe creators f our own tragichistory.We cannotthenpalmoff ltogetherhetragic utcomeupontheuniversen thesamewayas we can with naturaldisaster.Contrasthis ttitude owards ragedywiththeHegelianfetishismofhistory hich n the end is buttherationalization f cruelty. on-trast twiththeJudaic-Christianonceptionwhichofferst thepriceoftruth,hehopethatthe felicitiesf salvationwill bothexplainandrecompenseuman uffering.ontrastt with heattitudefUnamunowhosehunger or mmortalitys so intense hathe sees n intelligenceorreason hechief nemy f ife, oth ntime ndeternity.or himthejoyand delight f ife s the conflictfvalueand value no matterwhatthe cost."The very ssenceof tragedy," e tellsus, "is thecombatoflifewithreason."And since he nquisitors concernedwith heeternallife ofhis victim's oul,thepotential ictimmust defend heInquisi-tor'splace in society nd regardhimas farsuperior o themerchantwhomerelyministerso hisneeds."There is muchmorehumanitynthe nquisitor," e says.Crazedbythis hirstor he nfinite,namunoglorifies ar as thebestmeansof spreadingove and knowledge.Heillustrateshedialectic ftotal bsurditynd caprice n thoughtwhichoftenprepares heway foratrocityn life.Here is no questforthebetter, ortheextension f reasonable ontrolsn lifeand society, orpeace n action.To be sure,Unamuno s so horrifiedytheflux fthingsnwhichall things re ultimatelyiquefied hat he expresses ityforthevery"star-strewneavens"whose ightwill somedaybe quenched.But thiscosmicsentimentalitys disdainful f the vexatious,unheroicdailytasksofmediating ifferences,venofmitigatingheconsequences firreconciliableonflicts,f devisingways to limithuman sufferingwhoseubiquitous resences theallegedcauseofspiritualgony.No twothinkerseemso farremoved rom ach other s Miguelde Unamuno and BertrandRussell-and as philosophers hey areindeedrelated s a foothillo a Himalayanpeak.Butthismakesall themore significanthe similarityf theirattitude owardsthe artsofsocialcontrolwhichrequire heextensionfman'spowerovernature.For Russell, nyphilosophy,nd particularlyne likeDewey's,whichinterpretsdeasas implicit uidesto activitynd behavior,nd knowl-edge as dependentupon experimental econstructivectivityn the21

  • 8/12/2019 Hook Tragic

    19/23

    AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL ASSOCIATIONsituationwhichprovokest, xhibitsthedanger fwhatmaybe calledcosmic mpiety."t is an arrogant ower-philosophyhose insolencetowards he universes hardlyessobjectionable hen t stresses ocialpower han ndividual ower.It sfortunatehatRussell's ttitude-inwhichhe is notalways on-sistent-towards cientificowerand control f our naturalenviron-menthas not prevailed, therwise he whole of modern civilizationincludingmodernmedicinewould neverhavedeveloped.The chargeofmegalomania gainst nyviewofknowledge ustbecause t is notapure spectator iew is absurd. For the pragmaticview acceptstheSpinozistic ictum hatnature anbe changedonlybynature'smeans.The problemsto discover rdevise hesemeans.This cannot e intelli-gently onewithout xperimentalctivity. ccording o Russell'sownposition, oweritself s neither ood nor bad but onlythe uses andends ofpower.But sincehe alsotellsus that heresno suchthing s arational rirrationalnd,that ntelligencer reason shelplessn deter-miningwhatwe shoulddo withourpower, ne can arguewithmuchbetterwarrant hat t is his view, f acted upon,that ncreases thedangerofvastsocial disaster" hanthepragmatic iewwhichbelievesthatbychangingnature nd society,man can to someextent hangethemselvesn the lightof rationally eterminednds. No humaneperson an readhistory ithout eingmovedmorebyman'sfailuresto use theknowledgehe has had to remove he evils and sufferingswhichwereremedial hanbyhisattemptoachieve oogreat controlorpowerovernature. t was notsciencewhichwas responsibleor heuse of the atomicbomb. t was politics-a failure fpolitics o under-standthe truesituation. he pitifuldisparityt any particular imebetweenwhat we know and whatdon't know is sufficiento inspirea senseofhumilityn the most ntellectuallymbitious. ut it is onlyin the mostvulgarized enseoftheterm pragmatism," sensewhichRussellhelpedto popularizeby flagrantmisunderstandings,hattheadequacyof a theory fknowledge,whichregards ctivityr experi-ment s integralothe chievementfknowledge ffact, an be judgedby ts lleged ocialconsequences.I ammore nterestedonightnstating position hanestablishingit.As I understandhepragmatic erspectiven life, t is an attempttomake tpossible ormentolive n a worldof nescapable ragedy,-a tragedywhich flowsfrom the conflict f moral ideals,-withoutlomentation,efiance r make-believe. ccording o thisperspectiveeven nthebest fhumanworlds herewill be tragedy-tragedyerhapswithout loodshed utcertainlyotwithout ears.t focuses tsanalysis

    22

  • 8/12/2019 Hook Tragic

    20/23

    PRAGMATISMAND THE TRAGIC SENSE OF LIFEon problems fnormative ocial nquiryn order o reduce he costs ftragedy.tsview of man is therefore elioristic,ot optimistic.omephilosophers elittleman by askinghim to look at the immensitieswithout: thers elittle imby askinghimto look at theperversitiesand selfishness ithin.Pragmatism eniesnothing bout the worldor menwhichone truly inds n them but it sees in men somethingwhich s at once,to use theSophocleanphrase,more wonderfulndmoreterrible hananything lse in the universe, iz., the powertomake themselvesnd the worldaround thembetter r worse. n thisway pragmaticmiliorism voids the romantic essimism f Russell'sfreeman, shakinghis firstn defiance f a malignantuniverse,ndthegrandoise ptimismfNiebuhr'sredeemedmanwithhisdelusionsofa cosmicpurposewhich he knows s therebut knows n a way inwhichneither e noranyone lse can possibly nderstand.To themeliorist herecognitionf thegamutoftragic ossibilitiesis what feeds hisdesireto find ome methodof negotiatingonflictsofvalueby ntelligenceather hanwar,orbruteforce. ut this s notas simple s itsounds.There s no substituteor ntelligence.ut intel-ligencemaynotbe enough. tmaynotbeenoughbecauseof imitationsofourknowledge, ecause fthe imited each fourpowers fcontrol.It maynotbe enoughbecause ofthe recalcitrancefwill-not merelytherecalcitrancefwill to act upon goods alreadyknownand not indispute, utbecauseofunwillingnessofind ut what themaximizinggood in thesituations. And althoughwe areseeking osettle onflictsofvaluebythe use of intelligenceather hanbyforce,s it not truethatsometimesntelligence equires heuse of force?Let us takethis astquestionfirst. aced bya momentousonflictofvalues n whichsomevaluemustgivewayifthesituation s to beresolved,herational pproach s to find omeencompassing alue onthebasisofsomeshared nterest.his, as we have seen, nvolveswill-ingness o negotiate-tonegotiatehonestly. he grimfact,however,is that there s sometimes o desireto reason,no wish to negotiateexcept s a holding ctionto accumulate trategic ower,nothing utthereliance foneparty rtheother ponbrute orce venwhenotheralternatives ayexist. n suchcasesthemoral onus rests learly ponthosewho invokeforce. heirvictory o moreestablishesheir laimto be right hana vandal'sdestruction f a scientists'nstrumentsfinquiryhas anybearingon thevalidity fhis assertions,videncefororagainstwhich, ould havebeengathered ythe nstrumentestroyed.The intelligentse offorce o prevent r crush he use offorcewherea healthydemocratic rocess, quitable aws and traditionsnd cus-

    23

  • 8/12/2019 Hook Tragic

    21/23

    AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL ASSOCIATIONtomsoffreedommake tpossible o ventdifferencesn a rational ndorderlyway, s thereforeustifiableven ifon prudential rounds nemayforego uch action.This meansthat olerance lwayshas limits-it cannot oleratewhat s itself ctivelyntolerant.There is a tendencyn modernphilosophical houghtwhich, nrejecting oo sweepingclaimsfor the role of intelligencen humanaffairs,ettles or oo little ven when tdoesnot embrace wholesaleskepticism. f course, man mayknow whatis right nd not do itjustas hemayknow what s true nd notpublicly ssertt. n neithercase is this groundformaintaininghatwe cannotknow what actionis more ustified han another r what assertions more warrantedthananother.The refusal o follow a rationalmethod, o give goodreasons sonething: heclaimthat here redifferentationalmethods,differentindsofgood reasons ach with ts own built-inmodesofvalidity,s somethinglseagain-and tome unintelligible.o be sure,theacceptance f rationalmethods notenough.Menmusthavesomenon-rationallement n common. Hume is on unquestionablyolidgroundin asserting hatreasonmustalways serve a human need,interestr passion.But his mistake utweighedhis insightwhenhecontendedhat ationalmethod ouldonlybe a servant r slaveofwhatit served nd thatneeds, nterestsnd passions ouldnotbe changedor transformedytheuse of intelligence.n our flightsntospace ifwe encounterther entientreaturesapableof communicating ithus, t is more ikely hat heir ogicaland mathematicaludgmentwillbe the sameas ours thantheir thicaludgments,ecausewe can morereadily onceive reatures f differenteeds than of different inds.At anyrate heworldwe live n is one in whichmen do notshareall theirneedsand interestsnd yet t is one in whichtheyhave suf-ficient eedsand interestsn commonto make possible heirfurtherextension,ndtogive ntelligencepurchase,o tospeak, n its nquiry.The mostdifficultfall situationss one n which venthecommonuseofmethods f nquiryeemto leadtoconclusions hich re ncom-patiblewitheachother lthough ach is objectivelyustified. here isalways n open possibilityf ultimate isagreemento matter owfarand longwe pursuerational nquiry.We can conceive t happening.In suchsituationswe mustresign urselves o livingwithour diger-ences.Otherwisewe mustfight r surrender. ut it is simply non-sequitur omaintain hatbecauseno guarantee an be giventhat herewill notbe ultimate isagreement,enultimategreementsannotbevalidly eached nd justified.

    24

  • 8/12/2019 Hook Tragic

    22/23

    PRAGMATISMAND THE TRAGIC SENSE OF LIFEIn anycasewe cannot n advancedetermine he imits freason rintelligencen humanagairs.So longas we don'tknowwhere t lies,

    it is sensible o presson, at thesametimedevising he means to curbthe effectsftherefusal o reasonwhen it manifeststself.Aboveall,we must voidoversimplifyinghechoiceofevilsand encouraginghehopethattobe unreasonablewill paydividends.We are moving nto another eriodofhistoryn whichfreedomonce more s beingreadiedfor acrificen thealtarsof survival. heMunichmen f thespirit re at workagain. The stakesare now forthe entireworld.Our taskas philosopherss not to heedpartisan ndexcited alls foraction,but rather o thinkthrough he problems ffreedom nd survival fresh.n a famouspronouncementwo yearsago BertrandRussell declaredthat f theKremlinrefused o acceptreasonableproposalsof disarmament,he West should disarmuni-laterally even if it means the horrors f Communistdomination."Althoughhe no longerbelieves his, here re manyotherswho do.I know that ommon ense s at a discountn philosophyutin ethicsit shouldnotbe lightly isregarded. position ike thisobviously anhaveonlyoneeffect,iz.,toencourage he ntransigeancefthosewhowish to destroyhefreeworld withoutwhichthere annotbe a freephilosophy. ou cannotnegotiate uccessfully y proclaimingn ad-vance thatyouwill capitulateftheother idepersistsn beingunrea-sonable.Our alternativesre not limited o surrender nd extinctionof freedom, ne the one hand, and war and the dangerof humanexterminationn the other. here are other lternativesobe explored-all tragicntheir osts ut notequallyextreme. he verywillingness,ifnecessary,o go down fightingn defence f freedommaybe thegreatest orce orpeacewhenfacing n opponentwhomakes a fetishof historical urvival.On pragmatic rounds, he willingness o acton a positionikeKant'sfiat ustitia, ereatmundusmaysometimes-I repeat-sometimes-bethe bestway of preserving just and freeworld--just s the bestway of savingone's life is sometimes o beprepared o loseit. The uneasypeacewe currentlynjoyas a result f"thebalanceofterror" s tragic.But itmayturnout that t is less sothananyfeasible lternativeoday. f it endures ong enoughand itbecomes lear to the enemiesoffreedom hatthey annotthemselvessurvivewar, heymayaccept he moral quivalents fwar in themak-ing.The pragmatic rogramsalways o findmoral quivalents or heexpression f natural npulseswhich threaten he structure f ourvalues.

    25

  • 8/12/2019 Hook Tragic

    23/23

    AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL ASSOCIATIONI haveperhaps verstressedhesenseofthetragicn human ife nan effort o compensate orthedistortionso whichpragmatism as

    beensubject.There is more n lifethan thesenseofthetragic. hereis laughter nd joy and thesustaining iscipline f work.There areotherdimensions f experience esides the moral. There is art andscience nd religion. here are otherusesfor ntelligenceesidestheresolutionof human difficulties. here is intellectualplay andadventure. ut until men become Gods-which will neverbe-theywill ive with he senseofthetragic n theirhearts s they o in questforwisdom.Pragmatism,s I interprett, s thetheorynd practice fenlarginghumanfreedomn a precarious nd tragicworld by thearts fintelligentocialcontrol. t maybe a lost cause. I do notknowofa better ne.And itmaynotbe lost fwe can summon hecourageand intelligenceo support ur faith n freedom-andenjoythe bless-ings f littleuck.

    26