Faculty Corner: Where can we find the truth in higher ed?
Fred Bauer, Dept. of Philosophy
Issue date: 4/8/09 Section: Feature
Call it "Peirce's Dream." In 1878, the pragmatist C.S. Peirce declared, "The opinion which is fated to be ultimately agreed to by all who investigate is what we mean by the truth . . ." In 1892, his friend, the great William James, pointed out what was necessary if 'agreement by all' was to be achieved. Each of the sciences, he noted, has to begin by sticking to its own problems and ignore the rest. The reason is that each science "accepts certain data unquestioningly." Only when practitioners of each science have solved their own special problem will they be ready to meet with others to deal with those unquestioned data.
It is now 2009, more than a century later. There are more 'sciences' today than ever before. And, though the fact goes unpublicized, those who teach the distinct sciences have profound disagreements about their most basic premises. In other words, there is today a hidden chaos - a silent cacophony - at every institution of 'higher learning.'
Begin with the philosophers. After all, our President is looking to them - oh, yes, and to the theologians - to help restore the full Catholic Intellectual Tradition at Assumption. They at least have kept Peirce's and James' dream alive. You can tell that from the Assumption Catalogue. On page 137 it says, "Philosophy is a reasoned quest for and joy in understanding truths which are fundamental to all areas of enquiry." But there's a problem. They can't agree on what philosophy is or on how to interpret Plato's, Aristotle's, Descartes', Heidegger's, et al's texts.
Perhaps the psychology professors can help explain why the philosophers cannot agree. After all, they are the experts, the scientific experts, on how human minds work. Sorry. As Gordon Allport wrote, "Except for a common loyalty to their profession, psychologists often seem to agree on little else," a claim repeated in 1990 by Jerome Bruner, and already verified two years earlier when members of the APA broke away to form the APS.
It is now 2009, more than a century later. There are more 'sciences' today than ever before. And, though the fact goes unpublicized, those who teach the distinct sciences have profound disagreements about their most basic premises. In other words, there is today a hidden chaos - a silent cacophony - at every institution of 'higher learning.'
Begin with the philosophers. After all, our President is looking to them - oh, yes, and to the theologians - to help restore the full Catholic Intellectual Tradition at Assumption. They at least have kept Peirce's and James' dream alive. You can tell that from the Assumption Catalogue. On page 137 it says, "Philosophy is a reasoned quest for and joy in understanding truths which are fundamental to all areas of enquiry." But there's a problem. They can't agree on what philosophy is or on how to interpret Plato's, Aristotle's, Descartes', Heidegger's, et al's texts.
Perhaps the psychology professors can help explain why the philosophers cannot agree. After all, they are the experts, the scientific experts, on how human minds work. Sorry. As Gordon Allport wrote, "Except for a common loyalty to their profession, psychologists often seem to agree on little else," a claim repeated in 1990 by Jerome Bruner, and already verified two years earlier when members of the APA broke away to form the APS.
Be the first to comment on this story