Carlin Romano

I have been reading this book off and on for at least a month. I found it a bit of a grind. Even though I took three or four philosophy courses in college many decades ago, including a class on American Philosophy and Pragmatism, I struggled with the content. Not the author’s fault, as philosophy is not an easy intellectual walk in the park. However just like my college philosophy classes, I understood maybe 30-40% of it. Many of the names I was familiar with like Dewey, James, C.S. Pierce etc, I had problems with what they were contributing in terms of thought.

I read about a third of the book. I may try to re-read it at a later date.

There was a Goodreads reviewer who argued that Trump, his followers and his era have proved that Americans are no so wise and certainly not so philosophical. I agree. A shame, as I viewed Obama as a philosopher-President who thought, wrote and spoke very wisely.… (altro)

No doubt the very title of 'America the Philosophical' is one that will raise eyebrows and earn mocking comments. It is a contradiction, one which directly goes against a commonly held national image - or national stereotype. One might as well speak of Britannia the Gourmand or Canada the Tropical. National cliches aside, this is a very exciting and guaranteed controversial book which sincerely believes in the intellectual traditions of America.

The trope of America being 'mob-like' and 'anti-intellectual' is one long established. Plato's Republic said democracy could very easily degenerate into mob rule. Tocqueville in the 19th century noted the almost total lack of interest of Americans in philosophical problems, and Richard Hofstadter is a famous chronicler of its anti-intellectualism, citing the entrenched snares of religion as a major detriment to any intellectual foundation.

The first Big Idea is that America, with its 'unique', or exceptional, emphasis and cherished freedom of the press and freedom of speech, allows literally all major ideas and philosophies and schools of thought to practice here.

The second idea is that there is a strong undercurrent of pragmatism in American philosophy which allows it to be integrated into areas of modern social discussion.

After this, Romano goes into an extended long-term discussion of major American philosophical trends. First with the usual suspects - the Enlightenment predecessors of the founding fathers, the first buds of the 19th century - Emerson, Dewey, Santayana, and then to the modern Ivy League linguistic and logical traditions of Quine, Rorty, Chomsky, and so forth.

After this, he goes all over the place. Political philosophy (Arendt, Rand, Nozick), feminism (Friedan, Paglia, Nussbaum), literary criticism (Bloom), journalism (Moyers), and an encompassing section on 'identity' philosophy, which is a uniquely American upbringing - race (Delany, Appiah), gender, sexuality, and so forth. Romano even covers 'pop philosophy', covers such religious gurus as the Bhagwan, Robert Fulghum, and the epicurean Hugh Hefner.

An astonishing collection of biographical essays and interviews - Camille Paglia admitting she would have 'made a fortune as a dominatrix', and Harold Bloom, sage of New Haven, issuing dictums on Milton and Gnostic philosophy.

It would be foolhardy to classify all of these discordant views under one broad label. But somehow Romano does it.

A lot of what he includes under the broad 'philosophical' umbrella has a more direct connection to social issues and 'practical' or 'pragmatic' underpinnings. He draws the very beginnings of this philosophical tradition to neither Socrates nor Plato nor Aristotle, but to Isocrates, an obscure rhetoritician and pre-Socratic who believed in the practical applications of abstract ideas. And this is where the uniquely American philosophical tradition comes in.

Philosophy here is integrated with daily life, says Romano. See Arendt on the vita activa. Emerson on self-reliance. The identity philosophers contribute to our ideas of race, of feminism, of social justice and legislation. The literary critics comment on our ideas, on our thoughts. The journalists observe. Everyone from Cornel West to Noam Chomsky, from Rorty to Paglia, from Hefner to William James, has directly contributed in a physical way to the ideas behind American life and understanding. Emerson began independence and self-reliance. James begat the ACLU. One tradition which sprung up here from whole cloth is the philosophy and analysis of the Internet. Pragmatic is our philosophy. Think, and then do.

And despite the cottage industry which has sprung up around America's paranoia about decline, there still exists considerable influence - 'soft power' on the rest of the world. In the 19th century, Americans discussed the ideas of the classics, the Germans, and the French. Now, in the world's universities, they discuss ours.

The book ends with a rather hagiographic section on President Obama, citing his direct philosophical readings and influence from Nietzsche, Reinhold Niebuhr on the ethics of power, Emerson, and Max Weber. Romano posits that he is the most intellectually independent and unique philosopher since Woodrow Wilson, positing a new system of intellectual influence on politics, and "attempting to change the world through ideas". No doubt the Right will find this part sickening.

No doubt this book will incite a lot of heated discussion. There is the ugly remark that philosophers should 'get real jobs', that identity philosophy is a waste of time (some of the other people in the book might think that~), and so forth. While some may doubt that America is uniquely paramount in its cherishing of the tradition public debate and the exchange of the market of ideas, his positive and uniquely optimistic view of American intellectualism is one that will remain and endure.… (altro)