UP@NIGHT



UP@NIGHT
UP@NIGHT

UP@NIGHT



UP@NIGHT
UP@NIGHT

Adam Smith, on the left, looks through Brooks, while Hegel, on the right, can only think, “Oy.”
….
Poor David Brooks.  You just never know when he is going to get in over his head, as well as neither does he.  One can only marvel at some of the “out of left” field claims as well as arguments that he has made, while continuing to present himself as the an estimated all reasonable man on the planet.  Don’t get me wrong.  It’s hard to dislike the guy, with his schoolboy enthusiasms as well as his deferential feedback about the brains (specifically, the high SAT scores) of the members of the new administration.  And you have to prefer him to Rush.
But sometimes in his desire to show off as well as create a splash he goes too far.  Yesterday, April 7, 2009, was just such a day.  Brooks entitled his column in the NY Times, “The End of Philosophy.”  If that wasn’t pretentious enough, he then proceeded to tell us how philosophers have spent 2,500 years barking up the wrong tree because of the fact that scientists have now discovered connections be

[This piece was originally posted on December 14, 2008.   It also appeared in Talking Points Memo on December 17, 2008.  I am reposting it now because of the fact that of continuing interest.  You can find the original with feedback by selecting "December" from the calendar at right.]

Here is a prediction: the culture wars shall be left by the wayside as we enter a seemingly new land, the land of the tactically minded chief executive, whose tactics are the tip of a philosophical iceberg.  The executive is Obama as well as the iceberg is Pragmatism.
Comments regarding Obama’s pragmatism constitute something of a cottage industry. These discussions usually involve contrasting Obama’s pragmatism, on behalf of example, in choosing his cabinet, with the ideological approach of Bush as well as the neo-cons.  Here the term pragmatism is meant to denote political flexibility, comfort with the expedient, as well as a willingness to compromise.  For critics it is meant to suggest an unprincipled orientation toward questions of great moment. Given Obama’s willingness to label himself a pragmatist, numerous have been mystified by his commitment to specif

UP@NIGHT



UP@NIGHT
UP@NIGHT