matustik - 'from 'theoretical cleansing' to basic philosophical rights

7/29/2019 Matustik - 'From 'Theoretical Cleansing' to Basic Philosophical Rights'

1/3

From 'Theoretical Cleansing' to Basic Philosophical Rights: A ManifestoAuthor(s): Martin J. MatutikSource: Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association, Vol. 67, No. 6

(Jun., 1994), pp. 72-73Published by: American Philosophical AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3130539 .Accessed: 19/07/2013 02:30

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

American Philosophical Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toProceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 20 2.125.102.33 on Fri, 19 Jul 20 13 02:30:02 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=amphilosophicalhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3130539?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3130539?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=amphilosophical


2/3

PROCEEDINGS AND ADDRESSES OF THE APA, 67:6ROCEEDINGS AND ADDRESSES OF THE APA, 67:6

6. Examples are to be found in the journals Etappe and Junge Freiheit, nd the recentspecial edition of Fichte-Studien n the concept of nation and national identity.Other examples were provided at the XVI. German Congress of Philosophy,Technical

Universityn

Berlin, Sept.20-24,1993. See Ulrich

Ernst,"Hohle mit

Fermseher" in: Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 30.9.1993, p. 38.

FROM 'TIEORETICAL CLEANSING' TO BASICPHILOSOPHICAL RIGHTS: A MANIFESTO

Martin J. MatustikPurdue University

There is a new specter haunting the academy on both sides of the Atlantic, the

specter of those concerned with race, gender, and class as legitimate issues of

philosophical importance. And there are, at the same time, those who long for that

philosophical purity which effectively relegates topics of race, gender, and class to the

dirty margins of the 'nonphilosophical.' Can this zeal for restoring he purity of adiscipline escape becoming a professional cover for various forms of 'theoreticalcleansing' within the hallways f the academy? If diverse philosophers are incapableof cooperation at home, what can they contribute nternationally ther than an

academic mirror mage of Sarajevo's niper alleys?In 1977, when I was a nineteen year old freshman at Charles University, hePrague guardians f philosophical urity were going to throw me out for reading JanPatocka. They advised me then that Patocka was infiltrating the academy with hissubversive political agenda, and requested that, if I wished to study, I had to make

public statements distancing myself from his thought. In 1977, he was interrogatedafter he issued with Vaclav Havel the manifesto for human rights, Charta 77, and hesuffered a kind of Socratic death (heart attack) at the Secret Police station in Marchof the same year. Patocka's underground "Flying University" was nurtured on the

basis of broad philosophical rights and solidarity among theoretically diverseintellectuals, and provided a model of collaboration that later manifested itself in therevolution of November 1989. This autobiographical example evokes dangerousmemories: One reads nowadays papers by undergraduates dopting thoughts heldbefore them by the cold war guardians of purity: viz., that we need to return to the

pure western tradition, because paying attention to race in examining our receivedtexts is just hatred of that tradition; because the feminist theorists are just feminazisbent on hating dead white males; and because blacks and women are just taking jobsfrom white men. While this is a naively obvious way in which the undergraduates

nursed on Rush Limbaugh voice their biases, onehears from

manya

graduatestudent a serious worry that the cultural climate for getting hired as a feminist or arace or class theorist in philosophy is inhospitable if not subliminally hostile. It isnot uncommon that newly hired specialists in these areas must constantly try to provethemselves as philosophers to their departments even after they have gotten throughthe hiring committees during their APA and on-campus interviews. One reads in

6. Examples are to be found in the journals Etappe and Junge Freiheit, nd the recentspecial edition of Fichte-Studien n the concept of nation and national identity.Other examples were provided at the XVI. German Congress of Philosophy,Technical

Universityn

Berlin, Sept.20-24,1993. See Ulrich

Ernst,"Hohle mit

Fermseher" in: Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 30.9.1993, p. 38.

FROM 'TIEORETICAL CLEANSING' TO BASICPHILOSOPHICAL RIGHTS: A MANIFESTO

Martin J. MatustikPurdue University

There is a new specter haunting the academy on both sides of the Atlantic, the

specter of those concerned with race, gender, and class as legitimate issues of

philosophical importance. And there are, at the same time, those who long for that

philosophical purity which effectively relegates topics of race, gender, and class to the

dirty margins of the 'nonphilosophical.' Can this zeal for restoring he purity of adiscipline escape becoming a professional cover for various forms of 'theoreticalcleansing' within the hallways f the academy? If diverse philosophers are incapableof cooperation at home, what can they contribute nternationally ther than an

academic mirror mage of Sarajevo's niper alleys?In 1977, when I was a nineteen year old freshman at Charles University, hePrague guardians f philosophical urity were going to throw me out for reading JanPatocka. They advised me then that Patocka was infiltrating the academy with hissubversive political agenda, and requested that, if I wished to study, I had to make

public statements distancing myself from his thought. In 1977, he was interrogatedafter he issued with Vaclav Havel the manifesto for human rights, Charta 77, and hesuffered a kind of Socratic death (heart attack) at the Secret Police station in Marchof the same year. Patocka's underground "Flying University" was nurtured on the

basis of broad philosophical rights and solidarity among theoretically diverseintellectuals, and provided a model of collaboration that later manifested itself in therevolution of November 1989. This autobiographical example evokes dangerousmemories: One reads nowadays papers by undergraduates dopting thoughts heldbefore them by the cold war guardians of purity: viz., that we need to return to the

pure western tradition, because paying attention to race in examining our receivedtexts is just hatred of that tradition; because the feminist theorists are just feminazisbent on hating dead white males; and because blacks and women are just taking jobsfrom white men. While this is a naively obvious way in which the undergraduates

nursed on Rush Limbaugh voice their biases, onehears from

manya

graduatestudent a serious worry that the cultural climate for getting hired as a feminist or arace or class theorist in philosophy is inhospitable if not subliminally hostile. It isnot uncommon that newly hired specialists in these areas must constantly try to provethemselves as philosophers to their departments even after they have gotten throughthe hiring committees during their APA and on-campus interviews. One reads in

722

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/3

ISSUES IN THE PROFESSIONSSUES IN THE PROFESSION

some letters published in the APA Proceedings, or even in some course descriptions,proposals that define philosophical purity in reaction to race, gender, and class andtheir dirty 'agendas of non-philosophy'. When I encounter in print or in the

university hallwaythe

professionally posturingclaims about

race,feminist or class

theorists-'she or he is just a non-philosopher' or 'what they do is non-philosophy'-Ican't help but see the shadows and hear the echoes of those Prague totalitariansfrom 1977. I can't but be reminded that it is also an academic culture of resentmentwhich contributes to today's new forms of hatred.

It would be wise to move from narrow 'philosophical correctness' and 'theoreticalcleansing' to a charter of basic philosophical rights that would accompany anydomestic and international collaboration among philosophers. The questions ofgender, race, class aim to include, not exclude, certain topics as legitimate in

philosophicalconversation.

Hence, by 'philosophicalcorrectness' is meant here a

form of theoretical racism, nationalism, and sexism masked by a language ofprofessional or procedural objectivity and institutional legitimacy. A marginalizedgroup is not in a position from which it could level this exclusionary prac-tice-concepts of black racism, women's sexism, gay homosexism, and classismamong the poor are dishonest inventions and defensive reactions of the privileged.Hence the term 'philosophical correctness' applies here only to the posture that usesits power to further 'theoretical cleansing'. Both terms designate uses of power withthe intent to exclude, to theoretically cleanse, under the appearance of objectivity,

legitimacy,and

democratic voting, a professional meeting, a hiring, tenure, orpromotion process, a publication or peer review process, an association, a discourse,etc.

The rationale for a charter that would oppose this trend would not infringe onthe freedom of philosophical speech and expression. Any self-limitation on freedomwould be for freedom's sake and would itself embrace a philosophical commitmenton the part of all affected, to oppose the harmful and self-destructive violence of'theoretical cleansing'. This understanding would provide a basic overlappingconsensus that all parties affected can use their freedom only in such a way that

would be commensurate with the freedom of others. A minimal consensus would,in turn, pertain to substantive and procedural issues alike; no individual or group canpursue 'philosophical correctness' by the 'theoretical cleansing' of another.

GLOBAL ORDER AND THE SEARCH FOR TRUTHHans Seigfried

Loyola University, Chicago

Many philosophers disagree with Nietzsche's and Dewey's claims that it doesn'tmatter whether our conceptual organizations of experience are true or not; whatmatters are only their life-preserving consequences, or that they help us to settleconflicting existential situations. But in face of the need for a global order, it seemsto be irresponsible to keep alive the belief in universal, non-negotiable truth. A

some letters published in the APA Proceedings, or even in some course descriptions,proposals that define philosophical purity in reaction to race, gender, and class andtheir dirty 'agendas of non-philosophy'. When I encounter in print or in the

university hallwaythe

professionally posturingclaims about

race,feminist or class

theorists-'she or he is just a non-philosopher' or 'what they do is non-philosophy'-Ican't help but see the shadows and hear the echoes of those Prague totalitariansfrom 1977. I can't but be reminded that it is also an academic culture of resentmentwhich contributes to today's new forms of hatred.

It would be wise to move from narrow 'philosophical correctness' and 'theoreticalcleansing' to a charter of basic philosophical rights that would accompany anydomestic and international collaboration among philosophers. The questions ofgender, race, class aim to include, not exclude, certain topics as legitimate in

philosophicalconversation.

Hence, by 'philosophicalcorrectness' is meant here a

form of theoretical racism, nationalism, and sexism masked by a language ofprofessional or procedural objectivity and institutional legitimacy. A marginalizedgroup is not in a position from which it could level this exclusionary prac-tice-concepts of black racism, women's sexism, gay homosexism, and classismamong the poor are dishonest inventions and defensive reactions of the privileged.Hence the term 'philosophical correctness' applies here only to the posture that usesits power to further 'theoretical cleansing'. Both terms designate uses of power withthe intent to exclude, to theoretically cleanse, under the appearance of objectivity,

legitimacy,and

democratic voting, a professional meeting, a hiring, tenure, orpromotion process, a publication or peer review process, an association, a discourse,etc.

The rationale for a charter that would oppose this trend would not infringe onthe freedom of philosophical speech and expression. Any self-limitation on freedomwould be for freedom's sake and would itself embrace a philosophical commitmenton the part of all affected, to oppose the harmful and self-destructive violence of'theoretical cleansing'. This understanding would provide a basic overlappingconsensus that all parties affected can use their freedom only in such a way that

would be commensurate with the freedom of others. A minimal consensus would,in turn, pertain to substantive and procedural issues alike; no individual or group canpursue 'philosophical correctness' by the 'theoretical cleansing' of another.

GLOBAL ORDER AND THE SEARCH FOR TRUTHHans Seigfried

Loyola University, Chicago

Many philosophers disagree with Nietzsche's and Dewey's claims that it doesn'tmatter whether our conceptual organizations of experience are true or not; whatmatters are only their life-preserving consequences, or that they help us to settleconflicting existential situations. But in face of the need for a global order, it seemsto be irresponsible to keep alive the belief in universal, non-negotiable truth. A

733

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

matustik - 'from 'theoretical cleansing' to basic philosophical rights

Documents