I had the privilege of attending the 11th Biennial Public Address Conference this past weekend in Madison, Wisconsin. My first impressions of Wisconsin were not positive because all I knew of it was Superior, but a few days in Madison and I have thoroughly changed my attitude.
It should be noted that Wisconsin is a farm state. On my drive down from Duluth I spent the full 330 miles driving through farmland. Even as one gets closer to Madison one gets the feeling they are very much in cow country. Although I expected this I was surprised, quite frankly, at how much more rural Wisconsin feels than Minnesota. At nearly every highway exit is a very large sign indicating CHEESE for sale. (Comparatively, "Food and Gas" get textual short shrift in the Badger State.) I was lucky enough to be caravanning on the way down with my colleagues Elizabeth Nelson and David Beard (together with his lovely wife, Kate). We stopped at a Noodle Co. for some lunch, and my tomato bisque was superb.
The first night was an interesting lecture on liberalism and John F. Kennedy. The responses focused on how there are probably many different versions of liberalism around and that Dwight Eisenhower was a proponent of liberalism. (Most people don't realize that Reagan was America's first "conservative" president - even Richard Nixon ran as a "liberal." George W. Bush may be the last.) Anywho, after a learned evening we repaired to Dotty Dumpling's Dowry where I had the best cheeseburger of my life, together with some delicious cheese curds and french fries.
My two favorite presentations of the conference were on Friday. Angela Ray gave a great talk on the feminine style. Her argument, if I understand it, was that the concept needs revisiting in light of the fact that essentialism drives our discussions of the feminine - gender, of course, exists on a continuum. (How could you get man without woman?) Stephen Browne responded by pointing out how "style" and "feminine" are both problems to undersand in their own right. Afterwards, Karlyn Kohrs Campbell, a scholar who made her career by writing about the feminine style said she thought we should do away with the term. Indeed, there was universal consensus in the room that we needed to know more about masculinity and gender generally.
Friday afternoon Jim Aune gave a great presentation on American religion. His paper was an analysis of the little known Treaty of Tripoli, signed by President John Adams on 26 May 1797. The peace treaty over the Barbary pirates has an article stating that "the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion." This is really the first instance in American law, so far as I know, that says as much and signed, to boot, by a very Christian president. In any event, there are many who would say that America is a Christian nation, while there are many who would say it is not. (To give one a sense of how complicated the question is, I read recently that 25% of "Christians" in the USA believe in reincarnation.) Anyway, the words of the treaty are clear. Aune is definitely among those who worries about church/state separation. After the speech, there was a lively exchange between Aune and Marty Medhurst about this point. Medhurst has said elsewhere that the separation of church and state is not the same thing as the separation of religion and politics, while Aune is worried about the way religion gets used for votes and power.
On Friday night we convened to watch the Presidential debates. It was fun to watch them with a crowd, even though things were not quite as rowdy as I'd have liked.
On Saturday morning I spent some time tooling around Madison. It is a very cool college town. Madison is located on an isthmus between Lakes Mendota and Menona. Much of campus, including the student union overlooks Lake Mendota. It was a beautiful morning reading on the shore and watching sailboats. The facilities at UW-Madison are exceedingly fine. On my drive home that afternoon I couldn't help reflecting on how rich we are as a people and how amazing it is that farmers gave us all this opportunity.
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Experience
People have been talking a lot about experience lately, and talking as if it was possible and useful to compare the experience of one person to the experience of another. Francis Bacon, one of the more successful politicians the world has known, thought that when it came to kings, rulers, and magistrates, experience wasn't the right question.
And senators or counsellors likewise, which be learned, do proceed upon more safe and substantial principles, than counsellors which are only men of experience: the one sort keeping dangers afar off, whereas the other discover them not till they come near hand, and then trust to the agility of their wit to ward or avoid them.The passage has some serious implications for our time. Apropos, I think, as a description of the last seven years of American politics. Anyway, what was particularly interesting to me was that Bacon believed learning more important than experience held even more true in times of war. And, indeed, he is very persuasive when he draws upon the examples of Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar, two men renowned for their learning and eloquence (as well as their generalship). Admiring Alexander the Great is one thing, Bacon says, but considering him as Aristotle's scholar carries me away! The quotation is from Book I of Bacon's The Advancement of Learning.
Tuesday, September 09, 2008
le bon David
I recently read David Hume's Essays Moral, Political, and Literary. Hume is a liberal and manly writer, by which I mean he is a generous and spirited, good humored writer. I'm oft times disappointed in my countrymen who abuse the term "liberal," by signifyin' opprobrium with every use of it. Hume is a British liberal, which is to say he's for personal liberty in speech and thought, markets, and religion. Hume was an atheist, too. (One of the things I'm most interested in is the interplay between religion and politics/political theory. Starting with Hume is a hint that more will come on these themes.)
All of that said, I think I have a great deal in common with him. In addition to our names, he was by all accounts an easy-going, affable sort of dude, down to earth, and a practical reasoner. He enjoyed writing philosophy and playing pool. The French called him le bon David, by which they meant, Good times, Dave. My two favorite things that Hume said are these: "Philosophize, but amidst all your philosophy, be a man!" Also, when he was asked why he didn't write a seventh volume to his masterful History of England, Hume replied, "Because I'm old, I'm fat, I'm lazy, and I'm rich."
Here are some quotes from the essays I adore:
Essay IX: "the heart of man is made to reconcile contradictions"
Essay XVIII:
"When we reflect on the shortness and uncertainty of life, how despicable seem all our pursuits of happiness? And even, if we would extend our concern beyond our own life, how frivolous appear our most enlarged and most generous projects: when we consider the incessant changes and revolutions in human affairs, by which laws and learning, books and governments are hurried away by time, as by a rapid stream, and are lost in the immense ocean of matter?"
And from the same essay, some questions to tranquilize and soften the passions:
1. Is it not certain, that every condition has concealed ills? Then why envy anybody?
2. Every one has known ills; and there is a compensation throughout. Why not be contented with the present?
3. Custom deadens the sense both of the good and the ill, and levels everything.
4. Health and humour all. The rest be of little consequence, except these be affected.
5. How many other good things have I? Then why be vexed for one ill?
6. How many are happy in the condition of which I complain? How many envy me?
7. Every good must be paid for: Fortune by labour, favour by flattery. Would I keep the price, yet have the commodity?
12. I desire fame. Let this occur: If I act well, I shall have the esteem of all my acquaintance. And what is all the rest to me?
In Essay XXI: "Of National Characters" Hume argues that character is not touched by the climate of a place. I'm totally unpersuaded by this line. I think people in Minnesota are quite different from Texans, and partly, at least, because they live in winter chill over half the year as opposed to oppressive humidity year-round. The national character of Minnesota is very different from that of Texas, of this I'm certain. I think it has something to do with climate, where Hume doesn't.
Soldiers, Hume says, are lavish, generous, and brave. Their idleness together with the large societies they form in camps and garrisons, inclines them to pleasure and gallantry. "Being employed against a public and an open enemy, they become candid, honest, and undesigning: And as they use more the labour of the body than that of the mind, they are commonly thoughtless and ignorant."
Part II, Essay I: Of Commerce:
"A too great disproportion among the citizens weakens any state. Every person, if possible, ought to enjoy the fruits of his labour, in a full possession of all the necessaries, and many of the conveniencies of life. No one can doubt, but such an equality is most suitable to human nature, and diminishes much less from the happiness of the rich than it adds to that of the poor. It also augments the power of the state, and makes any extraordinary taxes or impositions be paid with more cheerfulness. Where the riches are engrossed by a few, these must contribute very largely to the supplying of the public necessities. But when the riches are dispersed among multitudes, the burthen feels light on every shoulder, and the taxes make not a very sensible difference on any one's way of living.
"Add to this, that, where the riches are in few hands, these must enjoy all the power, and will readily conspire to lay the whole burthen on the poor, and oppress them still farther, to the discouragement of all industry." Emphasis Original.
[Interestingly, Hume thought industry would be generated by the poor, even though today I always here that taxes need to be low on the rich for the same reason. Something's changed.]
Part II, Essay XI:
" . . . One extreme produces another. In the same manner as excessive severity in the laws is apt to beget great relaxation in their execution; so their excessive lenity naturally produces cruelty and barbarity. It is dangerous to force us, in any case, to pass their sacred boundaries."
"The humour of blaming the present, and admiring the past, is strongly rooted in human nature, and has an influence even on persons endued with the profoundest judgment and most extensive learning."
Part II, Essay XV: [Some good advice to remember during the build-up to our election in November]:
"It belongs, therefore, to a philosopher alone, who is of neither party, to put all the circumstances in the scale, and assign to each of them its proper poise and influence. Such a one will readily, at first, acknowledge that all political questions are infinitely complicated, and that there scarcely ever occurs, in any deliberation, a choice which is either purely good or purely ill. Consequences, mixed and varied, may be foreseen to flow from every measure: And many consequences, unforeseen, do always, in fact, result from every one. Hesitation, and reserve, and suspence, are, therefore, the only sentiments he brings to this essay or trial. Or if he indulges any passion, it is that of derision against the ignorant multitude, who are always clamorous and dogmatical, even in the nicest questions, of which, from want of temper, perhaps still more than of understanding, they are altogether unfit judges."
Finally, on history, Hume writes:
"The advantages found in history seem to be of three kinds, as it amuses the fancy, as it improves the understanding, and as it strengthens virtue."
As mentioned, I found myself disagreeing with Hume a few times. I do not agree with his essay on suicide, that we have a right to such action. And I do not agree with his thoughts on the immortality of the soul, that the soul is mortal. He is, nevertheless, a clear and engaging writer.
All of that said, I think I have a great deal in common with him. In addition to our names, he was by all accounts an easy-going, affable sort of dude, down to earth, and a practical reasoner. He enjoyed writing philosophy and playing pool. The French called him le bon David, by which they meant, Good times, Dave. My two favorite things that Hume said are these: "Philosophize, but amidst all your philosophy, be a man!" Also, when he was asked why he didn't write a seventh volume to his masterful History of England, Hume replied, "Because I'm old, I'm fat, I'm lazy, and I'm rich."
Here are some quotes from the essays I adore:
Essay IX: "the heart of man is made to reconcile contradictions"
Essay XVIII:
"When we reflect on the shortness and uncertainty of life, how despicable seem all our pursuits of happiness? And even, if we would extend our concern beyond our own life, how frivolous appear our most enlarged and most generous projects: when we consider the incessant changes and revolutions in human affairs, by which laws and learning, books and governments are hurried away by time, as by a rapid stream, and are lost in the immense ocean of matter?"
And from the same essay, some questions to tranquilize and soften the passions:
1. Is it not certain, that every condition has concealed ills? Then why envy anybody?
2. Every one has known ills; and there is a compensation throughout. Why not be contented with the present?
3. Custom deadens the sense both of the good and the ill, and levels everything.
4. Health and humour all. The rest be of little consequence, except these be affected.
5. How many other good things have I? Then why be vexed for one ill?
6. How many are happy in the condition of which I complain? How many envy me?
7. Every good must be paid for: Fortune by labour, favour by flattery. Would I keep the price, yet have the commodity?
12. I desire fame. Let this occur: If I act well, I shall have the esteem of all my acquaintance. And what is all the rest to me?
In Essay XXI: "Of National Characters" Hume argues that character is not touched by the climate of a place. I'm totally unpersuaded by this line. I think people in Minnesota are quite different from Texans, and partly, at least, because they live in winter chill over half the year as opposed to oppressive humidity year-round. The national character of Minnesota is very different from that of Texas, of this I'm certain. I think it has something to do with climate, where Hume doesn't.
Soldiers, Hume says, are lavish, generous, and brave. Their idleness together with the large societies they form in camps and garrisons, inclines them to pleasure and gallantry. "Being employed against a public and an open enemy, they become candid, honest, and undesigning: And as they use more the labour of the body than that of the mind, they are commonly thoughtless and ignorant."
Part II, Essay I: Of Commerce:
"A too great disproportion among the citizens weakens any state. Every person, if possible, ought to enjoy the fruits of his labour, in a full possession of all the necessaries, and many of the conveniencies of life. No one can doubt, but such an equality is most suitable to human nature, and diminishes much less from the happiness of the rich than it adds to that of the poor. It also augments the power of the state, and makes any extraordinary taxes or impositions be paid with more cheerfulness. Where the riches are engrossed by a few, these must contribute very largely to the supplying of the public necessities. But when the riches are dispersed among multitudes, the burthen feels light on every shoulder, and the taxes make not a very sensible difference on any one's way of living.
"Add to this, that, where the riches are in few hands, these must enjoy all the power, and will readily conspire to lay the whole burthen on the poor, and oppress them still farther, to the discouragement of all industry." Emphasis Original.
[Interestingly, Hume thought industry would be generated by the poor, even though today I always here that taxes need to be low on the rich for the same reason. Something's changed.]
Part II, Essay XI:
" . . . One extreme produces another. In the same manner as excessive severity in the laws is apt to beget great relaxation in their execution; so their excessive lenity naturally produces cruelty and barbarity. It is dangerous to force us, in any case, to pass their sacred boundaries."
"The humour of blaming the present, and admiring the past, is strongly rooted in human nature, and has an influence even on persons endued with the profoundest judgment and most extensive learning."
Part II, Essay XV: [Some good advice to remember during the build-up to our election in November]:
"It belongs, therefore, to a philosopher alone, who is of neither party, to put all the circumstances in the scale, and assign to each of them its proper poise and influence. Such a one will readily, at first, acknowledge that all political questions are infinitely complicated, and that there scarcely ever occurs, in any deliberation, a choice which is either purely good or purely ill. Consequences, mixed and varied, may be foreseen to flow from every measure: And many consequences, unforeseen, do always, in fact, result from every one. Hesitation, and reserve, and suspence, are, therefore, the only sentiments he brings to this essay or trial. Or if he indulges any passion, it is that of derision against the ignorant multitude, who are always clamorous and dogmatical, even in the nicest questions, of which, from want of temper, perhaps still more than of understanding, they are altogether unfit judges."
Finally, on history, Hume writes:
"The advantages found in history seem to be of three kinds, as it amuses the fancy, as it improves the understanding, and as it strengthens virtue."
As mentioned, I found myself disagreeing with Hume a few times. I do not agree with his essay on suicide, that we have a right to such action. And I do not agree with his thoughts on the immortality of the soul, that the soul is mortal. He is, nevertheless, a clear and engaging writer.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)