On misunderstanding politics as philosophy
I’ve been thinking a lot lately about the differences between
politics and philosophy – and how we confuse the two of them much of the time, treating
what are often basic political necessities as matters of theory.
We do that in explaining our
own actions, seeking justification after the fact, but also in explaining those
of others, criticising them for mistakes in their ‘thinking’ when it is not
always evident much thinking has taken place at all.
Politics is a domain of decision-making, in the world, not detached from it. It
is relentless, continuing day upon day for as long as we interact with others in
society. In it, our primary reference point is not detached philosophical
reflection and the theories that come out of it, but the immediate world around
us, of other people and institutions and the demands they make of us.
Of course, theory is embedded in this world. But we do not
typically relate to it in a detached, individualised manner – that of the ‘thinker’
sitting down and working through his or her thoughts. Mostly, we relate to it
with our social beings, in our need
to respond and show who we belong to (or where
we belong, in existential terms); indeed if we belong at all. Any genuine attempt
to find a purely rational or philosophical standpoint can only be laid aside in
this sort of daily fray: as irrelevant, beyond control and likely
incomprehensible.
Politics generally doesn’t have time for such questionings. As
Nietzsche said, “A politician divides mankind into two classes: tools and
enemies.” It is primarily a matter of ‘us’ and ‘them’, of defining who is with
us and who is against us and fighting it out. It is an activity of groups rather
than individuals. In taking sides, we give up a part of our individual selves, for
example in choosing to vote for one thing rather than something else, in joining
a party or a campaigning organisation; even in our individual lives, in who we
make friends with and pair up with. A marriage is an inherently political act;
the family an inherently political unit; a friendship too. In them, there are
bonds which are not philosophically justified, which are not the fruits of detached
thought and decision-making. They are rather justified by mutual reliance and
commitment, which bring their own benefits. The baby has no choice about who it
is born to, who it relies upon in growing up and the culture it is brought up
in.
This may seem like a pretty bleak picture if we value
thinking.
However it was thinking that painted this picture. The point of
philosophy is surely to try to understand the world, which means understanding
how political life works, indeed how life is inherently political.
In describing reality accurately, and not over-estimating or
misunderstanding its own role and influence, philosophy can have its daily
bread, even if it is a more modest meal than its advocates might like.
Comments
Post a Comment
All comments, however critical, will be accepted as long as they are not personal and/or abusive.