Richard J. Bernstein
|
Why Read Hannah Arendt Now?
—
published
2018
—
14 editions
|
|
|
Beyond Objectivism and Relativism: Science, Hermeneutics, and Praxis
—
published
1983
—
8 editions
|
|
|
The Pragmatic Turn
—
published
2010
—
15 editions
|
|
|
Praxis and Action: Contemporary Philosophies of Human Activity
—
published
1971
—
13 editions
|
|
|
Radical Evil: A Philosophical Interrogation
—
published
2002
—
8 editions
|
|
|
The Restructuring of Social and Political Theory
|
|
|
The Abuse of Evil: The Corruption of Politics and Religion since 9/11 (Themes for the 21st Century Ser.)
—
published
2005
—
14 editions
|
|
|
The New Constellation: Ethical-Political Horizons of Modernity/Postmodernity
—
published
1991
—
10 editions
|
|
|
Violence: Thinking without Banisters
—
published
2013
—
14 editions
|
|
|
Hannah Arendt And The Jewish Question
—
published
1987
—
12 editions
|
|
“Much later, I discovered Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr’s wonderful remark about Experience and Nature: “Although Dewey’s book is incredibly ill-written, it seemed to me … to have a feeling of intimacy with the universe that I found unequaled. So methought God would have spoken had He been inarticulate but keenly desirous to tell you how it was.”
― The Pragmatic Turn
― The Pragmatic Turn
“The history of philosophy is to a great extent that of a certain clash of human temperaments. Undignified as such a treatment may seem to some of my colleagues, I shall have to take account of this clash and explain a good many divergences of philosophers by it. Of whatever temperament a professional philosopher is, he tries, when philosophizing, to sink the fact of this temperament. Temperament is no conventionally recognized reason, so he urges impersonal reasons only for his conclusions. Yet his temperament really gives him a stronger bias than any of his more strictly objective premises. It loads the evidence for him one way or the other, making a more sentimental or more hardhearted view of the universe, just as this fact or that principle would. He trusts his temperament. Wanting a universe that suits it, he believes in any representation of the universe that does suit it. He feels men of the opposite temper to be out of key with the world’s character, and in his heart he considers them incompetent and “not in it,” in the philosophic business, even though they may far excel him in dialectical ability. (James 1975a, p. 11)1”
― The Pragmatic Turn
― The Pragmatic Turn
“A new form of lying has emerged in recent times. This is what Arendt calls “image-making,” where factual truth is dismissed if it doesn’t fit the image. The image becomes a substitute for reality. All such lies harbor an element of violence: organized lying always tends to destroy whatever it has decided to negate. The difference between the traditional political lie and the modern lie is the difference between hiding something and destroying it. We have recently seen how fabricated images can become a reality for millions of people, including the image-maker himself. We have witnessed this in the 2016 American presidential election. Despite the obvious falsity of his claims, the president insists that the crowd at his inauguration was the largest in history; despite the fact that he did not receive a majority of votes, he insists that this was because millions of fraudulent votes were cast; and despite the evidence that Russians interfered with the presidential election, the president claims that the “suggestion” that there was Russian interference is just a devious way of calling his legitimacy into question. The real danger here is that an image is created that loyal followers want to believe regardless of what is factually true. They are encouraged to dismiss anything that conflicts with the image as “fake news” or the conspiracy of elites who want to fool them. What Arendt wrote more than a half a century ago might have been written yesterday. “Contemporary history is full of instances in which tellers of factual truth were felt to be more dangerous, and even more hostile, than the real opponents” (Arendt 1977: 255). Arendt was not sanguine that tellers of factual truth would triumph over image-makers. Factual truth-telling is frequently powerless against image-making and can be defeated in a head-on clash with the powers that be. Nevertheless, she did think that ultimately factual truth has a stubborn power of its own. Image-makers know this, and that is why they seek to discredit a free press and institutions where there is a pursuit of impartial truth.”
― Why Read Hannah Arendt Now?
― Why Read Hannah Arendt Now?
Is this you? Let us know. If not, help out and invite Richard to Goodreads.













