Trotskyite: What role do history and philosophy play in creating your political opinions?
I posted this question in the Politics section and the History section, and now I am posting it in the Philosophy section to see if I get any different responses.
Answers and Views:
Answer by Rob
The enlightenment changed my life as well as Peter Abelard. I am a history teacher so history and philosophy are my guides. I believe that the smartest man or women should lead us as Plato discribes. But I think they are to smart to get into politics.
What an interesting idea – I asked a question about Zimbabwe in the politics section with little result but the answers to another question about the same topic in the travel section had really thoughtful answers. That was a bit of a surprise!
Ok – the short answer to your question is ‘almost everything’
In explanation:
History:
1. it’s difficult to see how we can have values and opinions unless they are shaped by our own personal histories. ..
2. …and in terms of history in general, the historical back-story (even if it needs to be extended to centuries sometimes) of any particular political issue is essential in developing a considered opinion.
(I’m sure someone is going to use that apt classic quotation about the imprtance of history – it can’t be me though as I’ve forgotten the precise words and the author. )
Philosophy:
1. After Thomas Kuhn wrote.’The Structure of Scientific Revolutions’ in 1970, it is impossible to claim absolute objectivity and freedom from the influence of theory. His thesis is that there are always paradigms (major theories or philosophies) underlying our interpretation of the world, whoever we are, geologists, political researchers or ordinary voters.
2. That’s why in considering political issues, its important to make our own philosophic position clear, to ourselves, as well as to the people were debating with.
(I’ve been influenced by the 20th century political theorists, Jean Elstain, Carole Pateman and Anna Yeatman. Foucault’s theory of ‘truth and power’ as discourse, has paradoxically, become the discursive site influencing many political opinions in the late 20th century .)
3.There is a neat one liner about this, which came out of the ‘value free’ debates of the 1960s.
This debate was between those who argued that political and sociological theorists should always be ‘objective’ and ‘value free’ Whereas their opponents took the ‘value-laden’ view , that commitment is important: that we should be influenced by value-laden philosophies. If there is no commitment why would we bother to investigate an issue? We would all be in danger of political apathy. Thus our politicians would never need to be accountable to us.
They described the so called ‘value free’ thinker as being:.
…. ‘so open minded his brains fell out.’
4. From the ‘value-laden’ position, objectivity is important but it’s achieved by being open and honest about which theory or philosopher is influencing your political position not by pretending to be free of this influence.
5. And the influence of philosophic theories is three fold:
a. the key words or concepts, we use are derived from the philosophy and this affects the way we approach and interpret an issue
b. the focus within the topic differs according to the theory
c. this means then that the questions we pose about the issue vary.
As an example,
Virtually all the postings in the Environment Category demonstrate these three aspects of the influence of the way that different philosophies affect our opinions.
The danger then is that we end up ‘talking past’ each other if we pretend we are the ones with the only worthwhile, value – free interpretation of the situation (in this example :global warming)
have a look at some of those debates – they are full of these false ‘value-freedoms’.
Political Science is (or used to be, before 20th century Dewey Liberalism) a branch of philosophy, requiring knowledge of metaphysics, epistemology, and ethics.
So for me, philosophy, and the lessons of history, are everything in creating my opinions.
Leave a Reply