|
Key Aphorisms
Relativism
is a denial of rationality in man.
Relativism
makes no assumption about man's nature but only about the nature
of his normative views.
Relativism
is that attitude to norms which enables us to act as if egalitarianism
were the fundamental 'norm' of the 'good' society.
Relativism
is itself a 'normative' attitude to norms.
Modern
relativism is a variation of the theory of natural law in which
'law' reflects the shifting ephemeral desires of man.
Relativism
is dangerous in a very basic sense. By rejecting the hierarchy
of values it insists on treating ideas separately, thus ignoring
their interrelationship.
Primary
Personal Philosophy
I think it is important to believe in a hierarchy of values;
to eschew what is merely practical or popular; to shape one's
thoughts into a coherent system of ideas reflecting a Weltanschauung;
to pursue long-range goals; not to commit oneself to secondary
objectives; to see a project through all its stages; to avoid
the distinction between working and living; to preserve a sense
of the joy of life.
Professional
Philosophy
As a political philosopher I seek to establish principles relevant
to the public good and to uphold the tradition of the public philosophy
of civility.
On the Role of
Political Theory
The neo-classical political philosopher speaks primarily to his
contemporaries but they do not understand that this is the case
(believing that his ideas refer to the past, to the 'dead' philosophers)
and they are not prepared to listen.
Political theory is not merely a history of political ideas: it
includes the latter but goes far beyond it. Traditionally, political
theory has been defined by an ethical component: its preoccupation
with the conception of the common good and the ends of the State.
In the twentieth century, a deviation from this high purpose came
from two groups: linguistic analysts, who studied the language
of politics, ending in a philosophic cul-de-sac; and behaviouralists,
who, emulating hard science, tried to build viable models of analysis
while pursuing the ever-receding goal of discovering general laws
of political behaviour. When the 'post-behavioral' era was announced
some two decades ago, the event took place in an aura of self-congratulations:
behaviouralists of the time claimed that they in fact had 'won
the day'. All this had occurred before the recognized advent of
Grand Theory in the 1980s. Political theory is now reasserting
itself, although many political scientists in North America are
acting as if they were not aware of this. (Nor, for that matter,
do they seem to realize that their professional orientation is
irrelevant outside the groves of Academe). Professional ideologies—like
empirical behaviouralism—have a long staying power, although
members of the academic establishment in each discipline (like
Marxists in post-Communist countries) appear reluctant to discard
the tools with which they had built their careers, hence they
are painfully slow in changing their outlook. Yet both groups
will pass. Philosophically oriented political theory has never
lost its relevance.
Its
ultimate relevance comes from what I would call the ontological
imperative: the destiny of fundamental principles to reassert
themselves—to create a new mental climate, a world-outlook,
countering the paralysing power of relativistic thinking and throwing
off its deadly ballast. The role of the political theorist/philosopher
goes beyond scholarship, beyond academic concerns; his role is
not merely to analyse the world but to affect the future—indeed
to try to change it. Such is his message for the next century.
|
