[an error occurred while processing this directive]

Rebirth of Reason

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unread

Post 0

Monday, October 11, 2004 - 3:51amSanction this postReply
Thanks, Orion. I hadn't heard of this. Horowitz is one of my favorite iconoclasts.

Post 1

Monday, October 11, 2004 - 9:13amSanction this postReply
"... the most important issue of our time ... "

Orion, I have a problem with those words (as you may have expected). Are they your words, or are they part of another "popular" review?

I also extend an invitation for comments from anyone, anyone who thinks that Islam (and the increase in "the right kind" of Statism needed to defeat it) is indeed the most important issue for the self-interest of individual Americans.


Post 2

Monday, October 11, 2004 - 10:45amSanction this postReply

Most of the time, whenever I post a book, I check to see if there's an available book description already included.  If there is, and I like the way it reads, I just use it instead of trying to think of something clever to say.

In this case, I just used the book description already on the book.

Post 3

Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - 3:57pmSanction this postReply
My apologies, but I must disagree with, or at least seriously qualify, the manner in which Horowitz as portrayed here continuously categorizes the entire Left in this manner.

When I was a used book dealer, I read a great deal of the Nation, which I could pick up free at the local library, and while most writers were very critical of American foreign policy towards the Middle East, at least half of those who wrote on the subject did not hesitate to criticize the repressiveness in most Islamic societies.  (BTW, I think American foreign policy is a colossal stupidity myself, but another time)

I'm currently reading a book titled Sacred Pleasure by a feminist in good standing with the serious feminist left.  I have mixed reactions to the work's thesis, which contrast a 'dominator' and 'partnership' model of sexuality, which does rightly criticize patriarchal conceptions of sex but posits a universalist and humanistic but touchy-feely and reifies sexuality as a pre-patriarchal ideal to return to.  But when it discusses various cultures, it is *anything* but unwilling to bring rational criticism to various cultures, and Islamic societies fare particularly badly.

I myself am not saying the Left is perfect, but I think the culture wars have engendered mutual distortions in both the 'Western' and multiculturalist camps, and both see the worst of the other.  The best visiphiles (including, I bow in respect, most Objectivists) are advocating a universal, Enlightenment reason which should not bear the name of a historical culture and which should critically appreciate all cultures; the worst are ethnocentrists and bigots.  Similarly, the worst visiphobes want to level judgment of all cultures to a minimum to protect irrational parochialisms from rational criticism.  But the best visiphobes are cosmopolitans who want not to level but to raise and educate our gates to the equal heights, in different places, of many of the world's cultures, present and past.

I myself see no irrationality in cultivating an appreciation for greatnesses outside of one's own culture, not do I see provinciality in adopting those excellences that were developed in one's own.  Most of us reflect first and foremost the excellences and blindnesses of our inheritance.  This seems a good reason to value a *critical* diversity and to presume that with humans beings everywhere possessing the same range of reason and passion, that there have been many wonders of many times.

Someone like Horowitz, given his record, is not encouraging such experiences.

Why not a multiculturalism that takes Lessing and Herodotus as its keynotes instead of Fish and Rorty?

Jeanine Ring

Post to this thread
[an error occurred while processing this directive]

User ID Password or create a free account.