Notes, Questions & Answers & #10: "Invoking Civil Society"
nau | english | rothfork | teaching | Taylor
Charles Taylor,
Philosophical Arguments (1995)
Notes, Questions & Answers & #10: "Invoking Civil Society"
1. What does T. mean by "civil society"; what is its opposite?
The opposite is totalitarianism in which the state dictates every dimension of life. T. alludes to Marxist totalitarianism in which "no dissident opinions should be expressed" (205) & everyone enthusiastically contributes to whatever social program the state offers. The opposite social position to this is anarchy. Civil society occupies the middle ground. Individuals are minimally constrained by law, but largely left to pursue their individual desires/interests. As a liberal, T. wants more than this Utilitarianism. Instead of being indifferent to your neighbors in public, & often feeling aggressive toward them in private, he wants us to be civil. This does not only mean being polite; it also means political involvement, compromise, & cooperation instead of self-righteous segregation.
2. How is the state a discourse community?
211-15: We have talked about specialized discourse communities, such as those of religion or science. T., like John Dewey, here talks about the most inclusive discourse community, the state, asking what it has as a focal point or what it is dedicated to as value/s. He says such values have historically varied. "For both the Greeks & the Romans, the identity of society was defined by . . . its political constitution" & institutions. The agora (marketplace) was the center of the polis where discussion/gossip was about politics.
The rise of the Christian church subverted this center, convincing people that their most fundamental concern was the next world & that was discussed in church. Christianity could not entirely replace the agora with the church, but medievalism certainly illustrated the hegemony of the church.
A 3rd outlook was defined by Adam Smith (capitalist Util.) in which money became inescapable & universal concern for every adult. Each of these values is public: "public is what matters to the whole society . . . or pertains to the instruments, institutions . . . by which the society comes together," 217. Each of these claims was totalitarian or reductionistic. Each view claimed that its vocabulary & concerns were the most fundamental & important; that if you succeeded in its dimension, other areas of life were unimportant. If you were powerful (or a saint; or rich), nothing else mattered.
3. What occurred in the 18th c. to radically change totalitarian/reductionistic outlooks?
The Enlightenment, which carried on the work begun by the Reformation: "The new notion of opinion in the 18th c. defines a quite different model of public space," 217. The 3 models identified by T. are hierarchical. Authority runs from the top down: emperor/general, pope, millionaire-entrepreneur. They give the orders; we follow them. "The novel aspect" of Protestant & Enlightenment society was/is "that public opinion is elaborated entirely outside the channels & public [formal, controlled] spaces of any authority whatever," 217.
4. Although T. doesn't recognize this, don't you think that Util. & Adam Smith's "invisible hand of the marketplace" contributed to the notion of consumers with myriad tastes, interests, & desires? J.S. Mill told us that economic tides could be statistically followed, but that economics could not predict how an individual spent her money or, before that, exactly what she was thinking. So, what is the glue that holds American's together?
You do this one (1).
5. How was institutional authority affected by the egalitarian influence of the Reformation, Romanticism, & Utilitarianism?
Consumer market analysts would have to listen to individual tastes. The paradigm for authority shifted from the top-down emphasis to the bottom-up model of voting. Egalitarianism is located in the Reformation; specifically in Protestant churches where ministers were "called" or elected by the congregation instead of appointed by the archdiocese & ultimately the Vatican.
All 3 models (politics, religion, & economics) were redefined by this shift. None of them could continue to make radically monolithic or totalitarian claims when "people have an identity . . . purposes, [&] even a will, [located] outside any political [religious, or economic] structure," 219. In his most popular book, Sources of The Self, T. identifies this development with Romanticism, which (as in Rousseau's Confessions) asserted the claim that ordinary, emotional life-experience was valuable in-itself without having to be filtered or picked-over to fit into formal patterns offered by politics, religion, or money. Sincerity is the currency or virtue or authority of Romanticism.
6. T. ends up at the top of 223 saying, "So our notion of civil society is complex." Identify some of the complexities.
We identified 7 positions above:
These are determinative systems in which a single causal force is identified: will-to-power, Christian or Islamic prophecy, or money as a way to measure ineluctable desire/pleasure.
We then redefined each of these by removing the absolute/transcendental claim & recognizing a pragmatic dimension of human agency. For example, we might recognize how something like Erik Erikson's stages of human growth & development affect power or morality or money; how age & maturity & subjective psychology crucial matter in how an individual perceives these social values. However it is done, the institutions of power, morality, & money are built from the bottom-up by the life experience & decisions of millions of individuals.
Finally, we added a relatively new canvas or focal point for public concern: (7) Romantic sentiment.
Post-Enlightenment civil society has marginalized the 1st 3 claims. Totalitarian political claims (whether fascist or Marxist) seem as extreme & neurotic as cloistered religious life or workaholic social Darwinism miserliness. Of course, fundamentalists/fanatics exist in all 3 ideologies, but each fails to convince us that her specialized concerns should be the exclusive public concern.
Four discourse communities (power, religion, money, aesthetics) offer us temporary & alternating identities & involvements.
7. Where is T. going with this line of thinking? What kind of society is he arguing for?
You answer this one (2).
On to
#13: "The Public Sphere"
(From #13 we will go back to #12,
"The Politics of Recognition".)
08.20.02
