Reply to Critics

The Pluralist 19 (1):95-102 (2024)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reply to CriticsBethany Henningplato knew that philosophy is not something we write; it is something we live. As Deweyans, we know philosophy is an ideal that emerges within experience as the highest possibility for dialogue. Insofar as a book appears as an extended monologue, it obscures the qualitative and transactive dimensions of philosophy as it is practiced. But sessions like these reveal that books are moments in a conversation, "perchings" in a dialogue that is forever in media res. I am deeply grateful to Bill Myers for organizing this panel, and for the generosity of Frank Ryan, Gregory Pappas, and Jim Garrison for having taken the time to read and think about this book. Each of them has served as a model for philosophical scholarship, and I am humbled and honored to have the opportunity to engage with them directly. They have challenged me in three distinct ways and have engaged with what I have written on separate plateaus of thought, at times revealing layers of which I was not fully aware. So I will do my best to respond to their concerns and develop our shared inquiry in their light. I will also own that my reading of Dewey is selective, and it is my attempt to work through a problem that materialized, as all problems do, in the course of ordinary lived experience.At Southern Illinois University Carbondale, where I attended graduate school, we offered a course called "The American Mind." The title was a provocation, so I applied to teach it one semester. It was a fantastic challenge to try to curate a selection of texts that would serve as an encounter with an intellectual tradition that eludes me as much as it informs me—after all, prior to college, I only knew that a "philosopher" is what becomes of the loser in the board game called Life. I did not know that there was something called "American philosophy" until I applied to study at SIUC.If philosophy is the way that a culture reflects upon itself, then in this book, I have tried to invite the American mind to lie down on the couch. [End Page 95] Or, it might be more accurate to say that I have asked John Dewey, as the representative of American philosophy, how he might psychoanalyze such a mind. My hypothesis is that Dewey's theory of aesthetic experience, and the art that communicates and preserves such moments of intensified vitality, touches the deepest, but unspoken meanings that human beings encounter. This is where quality, the character of an event as a singular whole, the immediate aspect of an event that we feel rather than know, can be stabilized and communicated. If an interpretation can be made of the deep conflicts that have left philosophy at the margins of American life, I believe we would be wise to begin with our "dreams," with the creations of our imagination, the artistic products that reveal the felt dimension of our shared world.Many readers of Dewey choose to focus on his theory of inquiry, his recasting of the scientific method, and his instrumentalism as forming the core of his thought. This is an understandable approach; his work here is novel and corrects bad intellectual habits. However, for the purposes of this book, I have emphasized aesthetic experience, the role of the qualitative, and pursuit of meaning over the correction of practice in my interpretation. This is a controversial choice since it courts the irrational and the vague, but I believe that our neglect of these portions of experience prevents philosophy from reconnecting with American life.Response to Frank RyanFrank Ryan is concerned about the extent to which I have cast the organism as porous, and that I have identified aesthetic experience as unconscious. I agree with Dr. Ryan's assessment that defining aesthetic experience as wholly unconscious would be a grievous error—and I hope not to have made it. There is a misleading ambiguity in the title of the book that might predispose the reader to suspect that I am claiming an equivalence, but what I intended to argue was not that aesthetic experience itself is unconscious, but rather...

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,227

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Replies.Noam Chomsky - 2003 - In Louise M. Antony & Norbert Hornstein (eds.), Chomsky and His Critics. Oxford, UK: Blackwell. pp. 255–328.
Reply to Critics.Liam Shields - 2018 - Law, Ethics and Philosophy 5 (5):210-230.
Reply to Our Critics.Marc Jeannerod - 2007 - Dialogue 46 (2):361-368.
Reply to my critics.Ryan Patrick Hanley - 2021 - European Journal of Political Theory 20 (3):599-604.
Title TBA: Reply to Critics.Thaddeus Metz - forthcoming - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice.
Free Will and Luck: Reply to Critics.Alfred R. Mele - 2007 - Philosophical Explorations 10 (2):195-210.
Reply to critics.Evgeny Borisov - 2016 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 50 (4):59-62.
Reply to Audi, Bliss, Rosen, Schaffer, and Wang.Karen Bennett - 2020 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 63 (7):758-794.

Analytics

Added to PP
2024-03-02

Downloads
16 (#911,065)

6 months
16 (#160,768)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

John Dewey's metaphysics of experience.Richard J. Bernstein - 1961 - Journal of Philosophy 58 (1):5-14.
Interview with Richard J. Bernstein.Roberto Frega, Giovanni Maddalena & Richard J. Bernstein - 2014 - European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy 6 (1).
Experience and Nature. By George P. Adams. [REVIEW]John Dewey - 1925 - International Journal of Ethics 36:201.

Add more references