What do you think?
Rate this book
John Dewey and the High Tide of American Liberalism
“[A] brilliant intellectual biography. . . . Ryan submits incisive, compressed accounts of Dewey’s important works and, with considerable flair, describes the major political debates into which Dewey entered. Ryan has an expert historian’s grasp on the major events of the century and weaves them skillfully through Dewey’s life story.” ―Mark Edmundson, Washington Post Book World When John Dewey died in 1952, he was memorialized as America's most famous philosopher, revered by liberal educators and deplored by conservatives, but universally acknowledged as his country's intellectual voice. Many things conspired to give Dewey an extraordinary intellectual He was immensely long-lived and immensely prolific; he died in his ninety-third year, and his intellectual productivity hardly slackened until his eighties. Professor Alan Ryan offers new insights into Dewey's many achievements, his character, and the era in which his scholarship had a remarkable impact. He investigates the question of what an American audience wanted from a public philosopher - from an intellectual figure whose credentials came from his academic standing as a philosopher, but whose audience was much wider than an academic one. Ran argues that Dewey's "religious" outlook illuminates his politics much more vividly than it does the politics of religion as ordinarily conceived. He examines how Dewey fit into the American radical tradition, how he was and was not like his transatlantic contemporaries, why he could for so long practice a form of philosophical inquiry that became unfashionable in England after 1914 at the latest.
416 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1963
4 people are currently reading
97 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
May 5, 2023
A Visionary Of The Everyday
In the course of a long life beginning before the Civil War and extending to shortly before the election of President Eisenhower, John Dewey (1859-1952) made large contributions to philosophy and to American public life. Dewey wrote extensively for both an academic and a public audience. He developed a philosophy of pragmatism and contributed significantly to American education. He was a socialist and was publicaly engaged throughout his life in addressing the issues of the day. In particular he criticized President Roosevelt's New Deal for what Dewey thought was an inadequate response to the Depression and a misguided attempt to preserve capitalism. He supported United States participation in WW I but shortly after the end of the War, he became an isolationist. He retained this isolationist stance until Pearl Harbor.
Dewey's thought resists easy summation. His writing style, particularly in his philosophical works, was long, winding, obscure and difficult to follow. As did many thinkers in the 20th Century, Dewey changed and modified his views with some frequency during the course of his life.
Alan Ryan's "John Dewey and the High Tide of American Liberalism" is an excellent study which explores Dewey's life, the influences upon him, his philosophical writings, his political activism, and the rises and falls in Dewey's reputation after his death. The book is somewhat dense and repetitive, but that too is a characteristic of the writings of its subject. Ryan writes insightfully in trying to place Dewey as philosophically somewhere between the despair of European existentialists such as Heidegger and Sartre and the English-American analytical philosophy of the 20th Century which denied that philosophical thought had a distinctive contribution to make to human intellectual endeavor.
I thought Ryan was good in discussing Dewey's early Congregationalist upbringing and his falling away from Christianity. I also thought Ryan placed good emphasis on the Hegelian idealism which Dewey adopted early in his career. The book could have used a fuller discussion of the nature of Hegelian idealism. As I read Ryan's book, I thought that Dewey retained even more of a Hegelian influence in his later thought than Ryan recognized. Dewey's emphasis on holistic thinking and on the relationship of the community and the individual remains Hegelian -- a naturalized Hegelianism as Ryan points out.
Ryan discussed Dewey's educational work at the University of Chicago. This is the aspect of Dewey's work that is best known. As Ryan points out, Dewey is often criticized for the shortcomings of American education. He is blamed, probably unjustifiably, for a lack of discipline and academic knowledge in too many American students. Ryan does point out, in fairness, that Dewey's actual educational theory was obscure in many points and undeveloped in specifics. It is hard to know just what Dewey had in mind, but it surely was not laxness and a deference to the wishes of young children.
I thought the strongest aspect of Ryan's book was his discussion of Dewey's mature philosophical writings, in particular "Experience and Nature" "A Common Faith" and "Art and Experience." In these works, Dewey tried to develop a philosophical pragmatism which was based on science and secularism. He denied the existence of an objective independent truth which science tries to capture and also denied subjectivism. Dewey recognized that human experience could be viewed from many perspectives and he struggled to explain how many of the goals of the religious and artistic life were consistent with science and secularism. He wanted to show them as perspectives equally important to the scientific perspective and to disclaim a concept of truth as "out there" rather than as sought,developed and made through human social activity. Dewey's position is difficult and, to his credit, Ryan does not simplify it. Ryan's exposition is challenging and made me want to read some of Dewey for myself.
A great deal of Ryan's book is devoted to Dewey's career as a public intellectual commenting on the issues of the day, as he saw them. Dewey traveled to Russia and China, investigated the Russian show trials of Trotsky and others, supported American participation in WW I, and advocated social liberalism. Ryan discusses Dewey's positions fully and intelligently and explores how Dewey's issues remain alive in the late 20th (and early 21st)century. The discussion of American political life and of the role of ideas is fascinating even though I frequently did not agree either with Dewey or with Ryan.
Ryan recognizes the paradoxical nature of the work of this American thinker. Dewey was a philosopher who criticized sharply thought and reflection separate from action. He was a secularist who saw the importance of religion. He recognized the nature of industrial society but stressed the importance of art and culture. Dewey was, as Ryan points out in his conclusion something of a
visionary of the everyday. Ryan writes (page 269): "It was his ability to infuse the here and now with a kind of transcendent glow that overcame the denseness and awkwardness of his prose and the vagueness of his message and secured such widespread conviction. .... He will remain for the forseeable future a rich source of intellectual nourishment for anyone not absolutely locked within the anxieties of his or her own heart and not absolutely despondent about the prospects of the modern world."
Robin Friedman
In the course of a long life beginning before the Civil War and extending to shortly before the election of President Eisenhower, John Dewey (1859-1952) made large contributions to philosophy and to American public life. Dewey wrote extensively for both an academic and a public audience. He developed a philosophy of pragmatism and contributed significantly to American education. He was a socialist and was publicaly engaged throughout his life in addressing the issues of the day. In particular he criticized President Roosevelt's New Deal for what Dewey thought was an inadequate response to the Depression and a misguided attempt to preserve capitalism. He supported United States participation in WW I but shortly after the end of the War, he became an isolationist. He retained this isolationist stance until Pearl Harbor.
Dewey's thought resists easy summation. His writing style, particularly in his philosophical works, was long, winding, obscure and difficult to follow. As did many thinkers in the 20th Century, Dewey changed and modified his views with some frequency during the course of his life.
Alan Ryan's "John Dewey and the High Tide of American Liberalism" is an excellent study which explores Dewey's life, the influences upon him, his philosophical writings, his political activism, and the rises and falls in Dewey's reputation after his death. The book is somewhat dense and repetitive, but that too is a characteristic of the writings of its subject. Ryan writes insightfully in trying to place Dewey as philosophically somewhere between the despair of European existentialists such as Heidegger and Sartre and the English-American analytical philosophy of the 20th Century which denied that philosophical thought had a distinctive contribution to make to human intellectual endeavor.
I thought Ryan was good in discussing Dewey's early Congregationalist upbringing and his falling away from Christianity. I also thought Ryan placed good emphasis on the Hegelian idealism which Dewey adopted early in his career. The book could have used a fuller discussion of the nature of Hegelian idealism. As I read Ryan's book, I thought that Dewey retained even more of a Hegelian influence in his later thought than Ryan recognized. Dewey's emphasis on holistic thinking and on the relationship of the community and the individual remains Hegelian -- a naturalized Hegelianism as Ryan points out.
Ryan discussed Dewey's educational work at the University of Chicago. This is the aspect of Dewey's work that is best known. As Ryan points out, Dewey is often criticized for the shortcomings of American education. He is blamed, probably unjustifiably, for a lack of discipline and academic knowledge in too many American students. Ryan does point out, in fairness, that Dewey's actual educational theory was obscure in many points and undeveloped in specifics. It is hard to know just what Dewey had in mind, but it surely was not laxness and a deference to the wishes of young children.
I thought the strongest aspect of Ryan's book was his discussion of Dewey's mature philosophical writings, in particular "Experience and Nature" "A Common Faith" and "Art and Experience." In these works, Dewey tried to develop a philosophical pragmatism which was based on science and secularism. He denied the existence of an objective independent truth which science tries to capture and also denied subjectivism. Dewey recognized that human experience could be viewed from many perspectives and he struggled to explain how many of the goals of the religious and artistic life were consistent with science and secularism. He wanted to show them as perspectives equally important to the scientific perspective and to disclaim a concept of truth as "out there" rather than as sought,developed and made through human social activity. Dewey's position is difficult and, to his credit, Ryan does not simplify it. Ryan's exposition is challenging and made me want to read some of Dewey for myself.
A great deal of Ryan's book is devoted to Dewey's career as a public intellectual commenting on the issues of the day, as he saw them. Dewey traveled to Russia and China, investigated the Russian show trials of Trotsky and others, supported American participation in WW I, and advocated social liberalism. Ryan discusses Dewey's positions fully and intelligently and explores how Dewey's issues remain alive in the late 20th (and early 21st)century. The discussion of American political life and of the role of ideas is fascinating even though I frequently did not agree either with Dewey or with Ryan.
Ryan recognizes the paradoxical nature of the work of this American thinker. Dewey was a philosopher who criticized sharply thought and reflection separate from action. He was a secularist who saw the importance of religion. He recognized the nature of industrial society but stressed the importance of art and culture. Dewey was, as Ryan points out in his conclusion something of a
visionary of the everyday. Ryan writes (page 269): "It was his ability to infuse the here and now with a kind of transcendent glow that overcame the denseness and awkwardness of his prose and the vagueness of his message and secured such widespread conviction. .... He will remain for the forseeable future a rich source of intellectual nourishment for anyone not absolutely locked within the anxieties of his or her own heart and not absolutely despondent about the prospects of the modern world."
Robin Friedman
November 11, 2018
The only part of Louis Menand's terrific primer on pragmatism The Metaphysical Club that left me still feeling a bit in the dark was the one on Dewey, so this was a natural follow-up. What emerged is that lack of clarity is a mark of studying Dewey; a youthful immersion in German Idealism, lack of humour and singularly infelicitous writing style made him flummox even his most sympathetic readers. O.W. Holmes Jr. put it best: "So methought God would have spoken had He been inarticulate but keenly desirous to tell you how it was."
Which is not to say that no-one gets Dewey. Ryan gives a thorough outline of his origins, intellectual inputs, main writing and controversies. Dewey was a towering figure in American intellectual life in his day, engaging in many public political and philosophical debates. One of his key ideas was that philosophy cannot be segregated from the public space, that daily life and political engagement must be natural outflows of one's metaphysical ideas. In the late 1890s Dewey expressed this with his involvement with Jane Addams' Hull House and the Laboratory School he founded in Chicago, and later it was progressive education that came to be the main focus of his thought.
More spiritual than his pragmatist peers (James, Peirce, Holmes), Dewey enveloped his thought in a deep layer of near-religious teleology. His early Congregationalist faith, which he would later rebel strongly against, coupled with his later Hegelianism (also eventually dropped, but less markedly) gave him this orientation. Dewey would become a materialist, but never a "vulgar" one; for him, individual fulfillment is impossible outside of community engagement. For this reason Dewey was seen the philosopher of America, a liberal idealist for whom democracy was not "the worst form of government, except for all the others" but the highest means through which the individual can find happiness. Until the end of his life Dewey would give "lay sermons" and was active in political debate.
However, as Holmes' quote hinted, his noumenal rhetoric never quite manifested itself in concrete terms, making Dewey open to misreadings, and ensuring there are no real "Deweyists" today. Attacked in his time from left and right, (he voted against FDR because he thought the New Deal didn't go far enough; but never stopped attacking the Communist Party for its subservience to Moscow and indifference to human rights, strongly and presciently opposing the evils of Stalinism, and even being involved in a Mexico hearing for Trotsky), Dewey was mostly forgotten after his death, then revived. Attacked by Christopher Lasch as an elitist, by Richard Hofstadter as anti-intellectual, Dewey finally found a champion in Richard Rorty, who saw him a more hopeful harbinger of postmodernism.
So after this big book, what is Dewey about? Firstly we can say what he opposed: big business/plutocracy, the Communist Party, rote learning (and the worship of classics such as the U Chicago Great Books program of Hutchins and Adler). As for the positive, Dewey advanced a communitarian ideal where education would uplift all citizens of a democracy into an engaged, participatory life. He supported learning through doing (some of his educational ideas are taken for granted nowadays), but also vaguer things. He advocated imbuing vocational training with more importance by making it less menial - but how? Dewey saw production under capitalism, just for the sake of a paycheck, as inherently alienating and inconducive with a fulfilled life. But how would his alternative society look? He acknowledged that the average man doesn't want to come back from work, grab some supper, and then head out to a meeting on which electricity supplier the neighbourhood should use.
Liberalism can mean many different things - Dewey's is much more like (in Isaiah Berlin's phrase that Ryan doesn't use) "freedom to" than "freedom from", much unlike JS Mill, Smith, and Hayek. Dewey also differs from the contemporary American left, which is a more practical Social Democracy lite. Dewey cannot be said to have given undue focus to practical issues, and his work can be frustrating, its meaning never quite coming into focus. But that blurry vision is still audacious and inspiring.
Which is not to say that no-one gets Dewey. Ryan gives a thorough outline of his origins, intellectual inputs, main writing and controversies. Dewey was a towering figure in American intellectual life in his day, engaging in many public political and philosophical debates. One of his key ideas was that philosophy cannot be segregated from the public space, that daily life and political engagement must be natural outflows of one's metaphysical ideas. In the late 1890s Dewey expressed this with his involvement with Jane Addams' Hull House and the Laboratory School he founded in Chicago, and later it was progressive education that came to be the main focus of his thought.
More spiritual than his pragmatist peers (James, Peirce, Holmes), Dewey enveloped his thought in a deep layer of near-religious teleology. His early Congregationalist faith, which he would later rebel strongly against, coupled with his later Hegelianism (also eventually dropped, but less markedly) gave him this orientation. Dewey would become a materialist, but never a "vulgar" one; for him, individual fulfillment is impossible outside of community engagement. For this reason Dewey was seen the philosopher of America, a liberal idealist for whom democracy was not "the worst form of government, except for all the others" but the highest means through which the individual can find happiness. Until the end of his life Dewey would give "lay sermons" and was active in political debate.
However, as Holmes' quote hinted, his noumenal rhetoric never quite manifested itself in concrete terms, making Dewey open to misreadings, and ensuring there are no real "Deweyists" today. Attacked in his time from left and right, (he voted against FDR because he thought the New Deal didn't go far enough; but never stopped attacking the Communist Party for its subservience to Moscow and indifference to human rights, strongly and presciently opposing the evils of Stalinism, and even being involved in a Mexico hearing for Trotsky), Dewey was mostly forgotten after his death, then revived. Attacked by Christopher Lasch as an elitist, by Richard Hofstadter as anti-intellectual, Dewey finally found a champion in Richard Rorty, who saw him a more hopeful harbinger of postmodernism.
So after this big book, what is Dewey about? Firstly we can say what he opposed: big business/plutocracy, the Communist Party, rote learning (and the worship of classics such as the U Chicago Great Books program of Hutchins and Adler). As for the positive, Dewey advanced a communitarian ideal where education would uplift all citizens of a democracy into an engaged, participatory life. He supported learning through doing (some of his educational ideas are taken for granted nowadays), but also vaguer things. He advocated imbuing vocational training with more importance by making it less menial - but how? Dewey saw production under capitalism, just for the sake of a paycheck, as inherently alienating and inconducive with a fulfilled life. But how would his alternative society look? He acknowledged that the average man doesn't want to come back from work, grab some supper, and then head out to a meeting on which electricity supplier the neighbourhood should use.
Liberalism can mean many different things - Dewey's is much more like (in Isaiah Berlin's phrase that Ryan doesn't use) "freedom to" than "freedom from", much unlike JS Mill, Smith, and Hayek. Dewey also differs from the contemporary American left, which is a more practical Social Democracy lite. Dewey cannot be said to have given undue focus to practical issues, and his work can be frustrating, its meaning never quite coming into focus. But that blurry vision is still audacious and inspiring.
September 24, 2022
Really liked this one.
Unlike Dewey's unintelligent texts, Ryan can really explain the essence of Dewey's philosophy in a way that modern readers can understand. He helped greatly to enhance my understanding toward Dewey's views.
Great audiobook too.
Unlike Dewey's unintelligent texts, Ryan can really explain the essence of Dewey's philosophy in a way that modern readers can understand. He helped greatly to enhance my understanding toward Dewey's views.
Great audiobook too.
December 28, 2018
Pragmatism and Democracy
Alan Ryan’s work gives the reader a clear exposition of Dewey’s main ideas, their meaning and role in his intellectual development. The book is readable, the text clear and fluid. Alan Ryan examines Dewey’s works in context and establishes a dialogue between the american philosopher and his critics (of the past and contemporary). Dewey’s concept of education, experience and pragmatism are well exposed and criticized. The idea of democracy that emerges from Dewey’s reflections is linked with communitarianism and pluralism. One can easily get such things when they get rid of metaphysics. This is an excellent introduction to Dewey’s work.
Alan Ryan’s work gives the reader a clear exposition of Dewey’s main ideas, their meaning and role in his intellectual development. The book is readable, the text clear and fluid. Alan Ryan examines Dewey’s works in context and establishes a dialogue between the american philosopher and his critics (of the past and contemporary). Dewey’s concept of education, experience and pragmatism are well exposed and criticized. The idea of democracy that emerges from Dewey’s reflections is linked with communitarianism and pluralism. One can easily get such things when they get rid of metaphysics. This is an excellent introduction to Dewey’s work.
August 30, 2024
Ryan’s book provides readers with a fair summary of Dewey’s work. I decided to read more about Dewey after suffering through a left-biased course (is there any other kind?) on higher ed law and reading Christopher Lasch for balance. Ryan laid out intelligent defenses of Dewey’s logic, and acknowledged his shortcomings to some extent. Overall, informative if not fully exonerating.
I laughed when the author mentioned that Dewey intentionally stifled “nationalist” or “conservative” students from speaking in his schools. Ryan, for his part, at least included this tidbit in his work- but he tried to bury it and also cast it in a positive light.
I laughed when the author mentioned that Dewey intentionally stifled “nationalist” or “conservative” students from speaking in his schools. Ryan, for his part, at least included this tidbit in his work- but he tried to bury it and also cast it in a positive light.
December 15, 2015
Read for the session I lead on John Dewey and Pragmatism in the last class of my Fall 2015 Classical Sociological Theory class.
Helped me prepare for the class. Pragmatism is interesting. Dewey a little less so though his writings seem like they would be cool to really get into.
Helped me prepare for the class. Pragmatism is interesting. Dewey a little less so though his writings seem like they would be cool to really get into.
May 28, 2008
This isn't great but I've learned much over the years from Alan Ryan's many other essays.
November 6, 2018
I came to this book as in introduction to Dewey and his educational philosophy to supplement my "father of progressive education and hands on stuff" understanding of his place in educational history. I am so glad I read this book first, before any of his own or even any books on just his views on education. A broad look at him situated in the philosophical, historical, political and social context of his times (and quite long times they were!) provided so much more insight and understanding that simply reading his own books or educational books about him could ever do. It is so easy to lose sight of the intellectual life of the past, so this book is especially revelatory for someone in my generation. I would highly recommend, especially as an in-depth, accessible introduction to the man and his influence.
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews