“Once a new technology rolls over you, if you’re
not part of the steamroller, you’re part of the road.”
Stewart Brand
Why so much emphasis on Western philosophy?
This is a reasonable question. Very significant and valuable
cultural achievements can be found in non-European cultures during
the same period that the Greeks started what we now know
as the philosophical tradition or the "Great Conversation".
Why limit ourselves to the Western stream of thought? There
are several reasons for this:
 The
first is simply pragmatic. It is almost impossible to deal with
the questions on religion raised by any cultural stream adequately
in one semester. Dissatisfying as it is, one must really choose between
listening
to one
philosophical-religious
tradition somewhat intensely or 3 or 4 totally superficially. In this
case, we
chose for
the former option.
The
Western philosophical tradition really does represent something pretty
unique - not necessarily more valuable (there are many human
values that are not strongly fostered by the study of Western philosophy)
but definitely in a combination and mix that never happened anywhere
else. As we discuss in class, this probably had to do with the unusual
combination of ancient Greek social and economic structure, geographic
situation and religion. The Greeks simply raised certain questions that
other cultures didn't consider - at least in that combination and intensity
- and, as we'll emphasize again and again in the course, it's the questions that
are important.
For
better and worse (and it is both!) the Western philosophical tradition
has dominated the development of an emerging world
culture. To even begin to understand the evolution of
global mega-cities and the phenomenon of a networked world, one must
understand
the
thinking of the West and the dynamic and volatile mix that resulted
from the confluence
of the ancient Greek and the Judaic-Christian traditions.
Why talk about so many "dead white men"?
If the emphasis
in the question is on the term "white", see above; if on "white" + "men",
then the question becomes harder. The tragic fact is that,
until the last 100
years or
so, most of
the thinkers
whose minds were systematically cultivated and their thoughts
recorded (= books were published, etc.) were Western white males.
There were, of course, brilliant exceptions such
as Hildegard of Bingen - but their reflections were usually preserved
for non-philosophical reasons (in her case, religious ones). By and
large, though, before the rise of modern societies
most
of
the recorded conversation took place almost exclusively
between men. (And, tragically, it still does in much of the world).
But if the questions are
important (and I believe they are), then it is necessary to listen
in on a
largely white, male
dialogue.
If the emphasis is on "dead", the answer is
straightforward. The so-called "myth of modernity" is just
that, a myth. Despite our technological preeminence, a very
strong case can be made that our present-day conversation is both more
superficial
and poorer that that of previous times. This does not necessarily mean that "the
world's going to hell in a bucket" (although that, too, may
be the case). It is simply a recognition of the fact that most of us,
"intellectuals"
included, have not taken the time necessary to think truly deeply about
much of anything. To echo Neal
Postman's book title, we've been too
busy "a-musing ourselves to death". As C. S. Lewis said in
another context, we need to be passionate advocates of the democracy
of thought across time; we need to count the intellectual "votes" not
just of our contemporaries but also those of the
generations that have preceded
us.
|
