40 of 44 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Do not eliminate the negative, August 29, 2006
This review is from: Pessimism: Philosophy, Ethic, Spirit (Hardcover)
This book is an admirable effort to detect a new strain, a new line of thought, a new philosophy in the realm of political thought. It is an effort to locate a 'philosophy of pessimism' which in the author's opinion provides a more legitimate way of seeing the world, than the various philosophies of optimism, which he claims dominate philosophical thought today.
But at the outset Dienstag strives to make it clear what this philosophy of pessimism is not. It is not a 'mood' a feeling alone. It is not the special creation of one person. It is rather a way of understanding the way most people think and feel about time as 'burden'. Dienstag argues strongly against the Philosophy of simple optimism, and of believe in inevitable Progress.
Here he explains one of the most important lines of his thought.
He claims that" most modern political theory, in response to the linearization and historicization of Western time-consciousness, has some fundamental answer to the question of whether the human condition is meliorable or not. There are many different ways, of course, in which one could imagine the human condition improved--moral, political, material, technological, et cetera. Yet most political theorists will have a position on which of these categories is most important, and it is along this line, whatever it may be, that one is justified in calling them "optimistic" or "pessimistic." Although Dewey may have been pessimistic about American political prospects, he had no doubt that the functioning of human intelligence, over time, was bound to bring about a freer, morally and materially advanced society. On the other hand, a pessimist such as Rousseau, for example, may grant that the material conditions of society have greatly improved over the centuries and are likely to continue improving. But this does not weaken his contention (indeed, as we shall see, it strengthens it) that at the same time the species has been degenerating morally. And since this moral degeneration is, for him, the crucial issue, it is appropriate to characterize his philosophy as pessimistic just as it is appropriate to call Dewey an optimist. "Optimism," as I shall use this term, thus encompasses a broader variety of modern political thought than pessimism, which names a relatively discrete group of theorists. The optimistic account of the human condition is both linear and progressive. Liberalism, socialism, and pragmatism may all be termed optimistic in the sense that they are all premised on the idea that the application of reason to human social and political conditions will ultimately result in the melioration of these conditions. Pessimism, while retaining a linear account of time and history, denies this premise, or (more cautiously) finds no evidence for it and asks us to philosophize in its absence."
Dienstag focuses on the thought of Nietzsche, Schopenhauer Rousseau, Leopardi, Camus and a host of thinkers in his effort to put together a coherent 'philosophy of pessimism" He has one especially interesting chapter on the role of ' aphoristic thinking' in the development of pessimistic thought.
He tries to show how Pessimism can help lead to a new concept of human freedom and individuality.
But it seems to me he makes no convincing final argument for the rightness of 'pessimistic thought' Nor does it seem to me that he has really opened up the right way for mankind to contemplate its own present and future. After all one great common sense thought is that ' bad expectations lead to bad results' or to put this another broader way 'attitude helps create result' He who expects the evil will more likely meet 'evil' than one who works on expecting the good.
In the Jewish tradition the rule is always to end with something good, to end on a high note, to end in a positive spirit.
So it perhaps should be said that while this book is not wholly convincing in its major argument it nonetheless is a work of many ideas and of potentially great interest in the reading public.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
9 of 10 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Important, December 14, 2007
This review is from: Pessimism: Philosophy, Ethic, Spirit (Hardcover)
The book is excellent on many levels, but its chief value (for me) is in the way it locates "pessimism" as an identifiable philosophical position. The author traces the pessimistic tradition through the Dionysian pre-Socratics, Rousseau, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, and Camus (as well as some lesser known philosophers). He suggests that the pessimistic tradition has led to two chief responses (an active one, embodied by people like Nietzsche and Camus, and a passive one, embodied by misanthropic quietists like Schopenhauer).
I especially like the way the book meditates, not just on philosophy, but on theatre, art, and literature. The author, for example, spends a good deal of time fleshing out some of Camus' novels, and Camus' ideas about the nature of theatre. The author also devotes time to Nietzsche's "Birth of Tragedy," which is a reflection on Greek theatre. There is also a chapter on Don Quixote, and aphorism as a literary genre. The book, in short, is a nutritious and wide-ranging meditation on the "pessimistic" philosophical tradition.
Pessimism (as I have digested it from this author) is simply looking at the world in an unblinkered fashion. That is, it is a place where life and consciousness is subject to time and chance, and without apparent purpose or direction. I think it is fair to say that Ecclesiastes might be another starting point for this perspective. In short, our wishes frequently do not match what a world in flux can give us. By acknowledging this state of affairs, and not denying it with false optimism, we are free to engage in certain gestures of our own meaning-making (Camus) or withdrawal (Schopenhauer). I thus think that this book is a good primer, not just to pessimism, but to existentialist and nihilistic philosophical traditions. It's hard (in my mind) to neatly untangle them. It's hard to know what the cluster of "nihilistic," "camus existentialist," and "pessimistic" impulses in western philosophy should be called. The author of this book has chosen to call it "pessimism," but i wish we could come up with a word that carries less baggage.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
12 of 15 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
So tantalizing, so thought-provoking, but oh, so restricted, October 16, 2007
This review is from: Pessimism: Philosophy, Ethic, Spirit (Hardcover)
This book rates at least five stars for its rehabilitation of pessimism and for its excellence at connecting the dots between different philosophers without an established "school of pessimism."
It ranks less than five stars for not fulfilling its potential and overlooking three major areas.
Dienstag's project of rehabilitation for philosophical pessimism is done well. He begins by stating two core tenets of philosophical pessimism, that it is anti-systemic and anti-optimistic. He also, in his preface, indicates he will most focus on where pessimism plays out in the arena of political philosophy.
From this, he tackles specific philosophers who can be seen as having a pessimistic core, and groups them into cultural, metaphysical and existential pessimists
First, he shows that many philosophers in each of these three categories did not take pessimism to a world-denying, resigned conclusion. Here he contrasts the culturally engaged Leopardi to the withdrawing Rousseau, the metaphysically engaged Freud to the withdrawing Schopenhauer and the existentially engaged Camus to the withdrawn Cioran.
Dienstag then devoted a separate chapter to Nietzsche, followed by a second devoted to the central role of aphorism as a writing style within philosophical pessimism. He finishes with offering up some of his own aphoristic observations, which make several good points.
I found his outline of pessimism to be hugely thought-provoking. I would find myself connecting the dots on one particular line of thought, turn the page, and see him doing similar dot-connecting in print.
Plus, looking beyond political philosophy alone, I found myself with the "aha" moment of "This is my worldview. I'm a pessimist." Even if there is no official school. That's especially true in his chapter on aphorisms and the afterward, where he says that scientific positivism, to the degree it has proved out as an optimistic, systemic philosophy, is becoming used up.
Now, the book's shortcomings
The first is early philosophers. It's bad enough that Dienstag just gives a passing glance to the pre-Socratics, especially since he talks about Nietzsche's analysis of them. It's worse by far that he overlooks post-Socratic Cynicism. (Capitalization deliberate; see below.)
Other than it possibly (though Diogenes himself has little to say on the matter) still having a cyclical, not linear view of history, Cynicism meets all the benchmarks Dienstag establishes to define philosophical pessimism. Skepticism, beyond his brief mention of Pyrrhonic Skepticism, also deserves more mention and coverage.
That includes a non-systemic, even anti-systemic philosophical point of view, a non-optimistic outlook on life, a rejection of social conventions (generally leaning toward optimism), arguably a rejection of Socratic conventions of knowledge, and an aphoristic-like mode of discussion of itself.
The second big oversight was not to include 20th century discoveries in the natural science. Quantum theory, if not antioptimistic, at least puts definite limits on human knowledge. So does general relativity.
The third oversight comes directly from philosophy. How Dienstag could not even have a word of mention for Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem, which is, at base, a wrecker of systems, totally escapes me. For that matter, beyond the theorem, the failure to include Gödel among modern pessimistic philosophers for discussion is a huge oversight.
Dienstag could have added to his three classes of political, metaphysical and existential pessimism a fourth field of logical pessimism. And he could have considered Wittgenstein here in addition to Gödel.
Now, it's true that Dienstag, in his preface, limits his focus to "pessimism (as) a philosophical sensibility from which political practice can be derived." That would rule out Gödel and Wittgenstein, to be sure, but not the Cynics.
That was his choice, though. He owes us a second volume, or at least a revision of this one to expand his view of the working-through of pessimism beyond political actions. Certainly, the subtitle of the book doesn't indicate it will be limited to political philosophy.
Yes, I should thank Dienstag for bringing these connections to light in my mind, But, why didn't he do this himself? He could have brought his book in at a solid, but by no means overwhelming, 325 pages with these additions. Or, depending on how much he pursued not only 20th century modern physics but 21st century neuroscience and its investigation of the emotional mind, 400 pages wouldn't have been too hard to produce, or too long.
Couple of other nitpicking points.
Here and in interviews, Dienstag calls cynicism (lowercase) a negative philosophy. First, cynicism as lowercased is a psychology, not a philosophy. Greek Cynicism is by no means a negative philosophy. For that matter, the same applies to skepticism the attitudinal state vs. Skepticism the philosophical school.
For someone new to the field of philosophy, let alone political philosophy, this book might be five-star worthy. But, to me, Dienstag falls short of that mark. And, the last observations were just about enough to three-star it for me.
I finally did so in the end precisely because this book could have been so much more.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
