Sidney Morgenbesser on the American Pragmatists: Section 1

[JackSafferyRowe]

Why the Shostakovich intro music?

[SkormFlinxingGlock]

@JackSafferyRowe Thank you! I've been trying to figure out whose music the intro is from. Can you tell me the name of the piece?

[soursourapples]

this guy is a jerk. bryan magee is having such a hard time getting him to speak in plain english. just imagine a young rorty in this interview!

[bruceengony]

oh shut the fuck up you geek faggots

[soursourapples]

lol!

[philosofreek]

Today I feel like tossing all my books, but

I am too GD insecure. Anyone having one

of these days?

[drewsiferdrew]

Don't worry about it; this guy isn't a good teacher. They should have had someone else do the pragmatists. Someone who is more direct and detached.

[philosofreek]

Thanks for the considerable comment. My frustration stemmed from the fact that my ADD was in full bloom. I may have

well been in a room full of fire engines. Makes me krazy.

[soursourapples]

too right

[BlackThoughtChannel]

Is this from the 1980s?

[philosofreek]

Without due examination, I don't think so.

Nontheless, comments made here in this

particular segment are peripheral and

somewhat banal if I may..........regardless

of the time or era the station of theory must remain.

[numberonesurvivor75]

John Dewey's work has been among the most harmful ever written.

[christopherleemiles]

How so?

[numberonesurvivor75]

I don't see what thread you replied to, but as far as Dewey goes, he was quite different from Peirce. Dewey intended to use Peircean pragmatism to psychologically condition children in school. Peirce's writings were staunchly libertarian. Dewey's were more fascistic. Dewey, by desiring to use logic of inquiry to deal with paradox, ultimately develops a fascist or communist institution.

Peirce wanted to deal with the semiotic nature of conception.Dewey was concerned with...(continued)

[numberonesurvivor75]

(cont) making the world in his own image.

[christopherleemiles]

Perhaps I'm ignorant, but in my understanding, Communism--in theory--is the opposite of Fascism. So I do not see how Dewey's methods, as you claim them to be, could "develop" institutions based upon political ideologies that are diametrically opposed.

[bradh57]

While Communism and Fascism have differences, the are not diametrically opposed. Both use coercive force to control citizens, to shape the world in the ruling class's image. Both seek to 'centrally plan' a society.

They differ on the what the outcome of the society that they shape will be. They also differ on who will be doing the planning.

Both communism and fascism are types of authoritarian rule, where the interests and freedoms of the individual are subordinated to those of the state

[Chay216]

You're thinking of Communism under Totalitarianism such as Stalin. Communism in it's pure Marxian sense refers to a classless, statless, and oppression-free society where decisions on what to produce and what policies to pursue are made democratically, allowing every member of society to participate in the decision-making process in both the political and economic spheres of life.

[bradh57]

Authoritarian rule can still be in place in a democracy. If 51% of the people vote to take all the property and possessions away form the other 49% of the population and put them in concentration camps or Gulags, this is a democratic decision with every member participating in the decision making process. However, it is still authoritarian rule.

I see the similarity between the two as the rights of individuals being subordinate to majority rule or a dictator.

[Jayban123]

A victim of the anti-ideology department of the corporate propaganda model right here.

What you've described there is State-Capitalism.

[LikeAGlassAsterisk]

@bradh57

You are conflating Leninism, Stalinism and Maoism with communism.

[Questfortruth86]

Communism and fascism are mere extensions of the socialist doctrine, which is more of a mentality than anything else. This doctrine claims that individuals are merely components of the larger picture (society), and that they are unable to do what's in societies best interest because they are too narrow-sighted. Thus, individuals must be driven into action so that the machine (society) can function 'properly.' This doctrine is diametrically opposed to liberalism and spontaneous order.

[Questfortruth86]

The liberal political theorists and economists were nonexistent in Germany. They were driven out of Bavaria during their communist revolution, by Bismarck and his welfare state, and by the Marxian German historical school (later became pro-fascist), which was the intellectual center of continental Europe. The emergence of the Nazi party was the result of an inter-socialist power struggle. 3 parties (Marxists, social democrats, and Nazi's) argued over which form of socialism was superior.

[barrywinehousexp]

Lord, this is man is vulgar ... Magee makes a heroic effort to maintain his comportment, but even with his conversational skills it's almost as if one can see quantities of spiritual vomit manifesting in his mouth that, try as he might, some escapes.

This interview is the only grating one of the series, a shame.

[numberonesurvivor75]

I thought Dr. Morgan gave a very good response.

[numberonesurvivor75]

oops, that Dr. Morgenbesser.

[tmertube]

LOLOL! He blew my speakers out... Not to mention he does a terrible job disscussing Peirce. I guess he thought if he complicated the language he'd seem like less of a douche bag than he already is.

[pooya1312]

Tmertube,

Why do you think he does a terrible job of discussing Peirce? Have you read "Fixation of Belief" and "How to Make Our Ideas Clear"?

[funstuff2006]

@tmertube

Have you READ Peirce? Compared to the grandiloquent jibber-jabber Peirce lays down, Morgenbesser is speaking in the plainest terms ever.

[entropia34332]

morgenschlimmer's voice sounds like a broken trumpet in the ghetto ...

fuck you morgenshit! you almost destroyed my speakers...

[trisix99]

I love Pragmatism.

[lund117]

You're absolutely right, R@F!

More often than not Rorty was better at presenting other philosophers' ideas than they were themselves.

This guy simply does not compare to Rorty

[ROBERTetFRANCOIS]

Magee's irritation in this regard is palpable; one can imagine him missing the wiry American, Searle, who could adumbrate Wittgenstein in less than 50 minutes.

[ROBERTetFRANCOIS]

All of these videos are wonderful, and fun to watch. It was very kind of you to post them! Morgenbesser, however, does a terrible job of explaining the concepts of these philosophers. If only Rorty had been getting the media attention he had later in life--his very straight-forward, sarsaparilla approach to elaboration is much more akin to that of Peirce and James than Morgenbesser's lazy, needlessly ambiguous ramblings.

[entropia34332]

thanx for this post...now i can breath again

[jimbopumbapigsticks]

@ROBERTetFRANCOIS I was gonna say, this guy makes a dog's dinner out explaining the pragmatist tradition. You can see Magee getting exasperated that he has to keep him on track. They should have asked Hilary Putnam to do another one - his philosophy of science interview was excellent.

[tireiron]

Thanks!

[Angk0rwat]

flame, posting all of these interviews makes you a quality human being.

[mikearthur21]

indeed