Paradoxes of Freedom

by Sidney Hook

One of America's most influential social philosophers offers a restatement of traditional liberal-democratic views as they pertain to our constitutional form of government.The topics explored in Sidney Hook's book include the nature and extent of human freedom, the Bill of Rights, judicial review as it pertains to constitutional interpretation and the balance of powers among the three branches of government, censorship, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, social justice, the importance of intelligence in political and moral spheres, as well as civil disobedience and the right to revolution within a democratic order.Here we have a sustained, nonpartisan analysis of the place of the Constitution and judicial review within our democracy. Special emphasis is given to reconsidering the proper role of the Supreme Court if and when a Constitutional Convention is convoked to address this and related questions.

Genres: Philosophy

169 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1962

About the author

Sidney Hook was an American pragmatic philosopher known for his contributions to public debates. A student of John Dewey, Hook continued to examine the philosophy of history, of education, politics, and of ethics. He was known for his criticisms of totalitarianism (fascism and Marxism–Leninism). A pragmatic social democrat, Hook sometimes cooperated with conservatives, particularly in opposing communism. After WWII, he argued that members of conspiracies, like the Communist Party USA and other Leninist conspiracies, ethically could be barred from holding offices of public trust.

Reviews

[Steven H · Rating 5 out of 5]

THE FAMED AMERICAN PHILOSOPHER LOOKS AT SOME PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH “DEMOCRACY”

Sidney Hook (1902-1989) was an American philosopher of the Pragmatist school known for his contributions to the philosophy of history, the philosophy of education, political theory, and ethics. After embracing Communism in his youth, Hook was later known for his criticisms of totalitarianism, both fascism, and Marxism–Leninism.

He wrote in the Preface to this 1962 book, “This book is an elaboration of three lectures delivered at the University of California, Berkeley, in March 1961… The lectures were addressed to a general audience, and discussed themes which I hope some day to give more extended and systematic treatment… I make no claim to a definitive solution of any problems, but have contented myself with the attempt to state issues clearly and with the presentation of a viewpoint which challenges certain current doctrines.”

He says about the “doctrine of absolute rights”: “the right favored or expressed by the rule which guides conflicts between prima facie rights is not absolute except conditionally---that is, it is merely more definite and precise in the set of given conditions It guides us in deciding the class of cases created by similar conflicts of rights in similar conditions. It does not necessarily bind us forever… the very nature of social and historical life is that the relevant circumstances and presuppositions may change…” (Pg. 22)

He points out, “Religious freedom is, has been, and should be always subject to the control of ethical principles. It is these which have primacy. Under our Bill of Rights, which guarantees freedom of religion, we do not permit a religion of human sacrifice or mutilation; we do not tolerate the refusal to pay taxes on religious grounds; we do not permit parents on religious grounds to prevent their children from being inoculated against disease or from receiving an education. We do not even permit otherwise law-abiding citizens piously to carry out the command of the Old Testament to be fruitful and multiply through a system of plural marriages…” (Pg.24)

He observes, “The reading [of the Constitution] … that we are confronted with two entirely different kinds of speech---one to which we have an absolute right, and one to which we have not---must be treated not as a discovery but as a proposal. As a proposal it suffers from fatal difficulties. Either it begs the questions at issue by DEFINING speech about public affairs in such a way that it never conflicts with, or threatens, other constitutional rights like justice and public safety; or, if it does not so define it, it furnishes no guide whatsoever in the difficult task of determining when speech is about public affairs and when about private affairs.” (Pg. 40-41)

He suggests, “The faith of a democrat is that political wisdom and virtue will sustain themselves in the free market of ideas without government controls so long as the channels of communication are kept open.” (Pg. 46) Later, he adds, “The real challenge to democratic government is whether the locus of the local authority on which every government must rest can be found in the processes of intelligence as they develop from the matrix of freely given consent---or whether it must be entrusted to a special group of guardians, philosophical of judicial.” (Pg. 62)

He states, “Democracy is not an absolute value. In certain situations and in certain historical conditions, its uniqueness may be so prejudicial to freedom of mind, social justice, and other civilized virtues as to make some form of enlightened despotism … preferable to it. The postulate that men can govern themselves may break down under the burden of problems too great to be solved or when sizable numbers are crazed by hate. But so long as one professes Jefferson’s democratic faith, one must intelligently expand, not contract, the democratic process.” (Pg. 105) Later, he adds, “To the question, then, whether anybody who accepts the principle of democratic self-government can believe in the right to a revolution in a democracy, the answer is obviously ‘No.’” (Pg. 113)

Though more than sixty years old, this book will still interest those studying political philosophy.

[Craig Bolton]

Paradoxes of Freedom (Great Books in Philosophy) by Sidney Hook (1987)