Tim's Light Reading (3-1-2012): The Information Age, ISIH, Ron Paul, Religious Freedom, And The Minds Of Children

1 (of 5). The History of the Information Age

One could do worse for primary and secondary intellectual history sources on "the information age" (depending on how defines that age) than those listed in this "FiveBooks Interview" with Nicholas Carr. Three of the books Carr recommends are, in fact, histories of some sort. Standage's The Victorian Internet is number one on Carr's list.


2. The Mind of Ron Paul

I noted in the other post that I wasn't interested in writing any more about Rick Santorum. But I didn't promise I wouldn't offer something on history and another contemporary politician. This piece on Ron Paul, for instance, is different. Authored by David Halbfinger for The New York Times, the title signals its historical bent: "Ron Paul’s Flinty Worldview Was Forged in Early Family Life." Here's an excerpt from the articles opening passages:

His father and mother worked tirelessly running a small dairy, and young Ron showed the same drive — delivering The Pittsburgh Press, mowing lawns, scooping ice cream as a soda jerk. He also embraced their politics, an instinctive conservatism that viewed Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Harry S. Truman as villains and blamed Democrats for getting America into wars.

As a young doctor in training, dissecting cadavers or practicing surgery on dogs, he would tell all who would listen about how the country was headed down the wrong path, about the urgency of a strict gold standard and about the dangers of allowing government too much power over people’s lives.

“Once that got ingrained, that became his religion,” said his brother Jerrold, a minister and a psychotherapist. “He says he preaches the ‘gospel of freedom’ — that’s the money quote. Politics became his crusade.”

And the article's thesis: Supporters and detractors often marvel at his consistency since entering politics in 1974, citing it as evidence of either levelheadedness or lunacy. It contrasts sharply with some of the rivals he is trailing in the Republican primaries, including Mitt Romney, who is often accused of ideological flip-flopping.

As the article progresses you learn more about the books he read (e.g. Atlas Shrugged, Doctor Zhivago, The Road to Serfdom), the family roots of his ideology, and his relationship with the Birchers.


3. The ISIH Annual Meeting for 2012

Here's the CFP for the ISIH's 2012 meeting. Here's the title: "The Importance of Learning: Liberal Education and Scholarship in Historical Perspective." Very cool. And the meeting is on U.S. soil!---at Princeton University. Cool. Too bad my travel funds are uncertain for this year because I'd love to go and talk about the great books as liberal learning in a transnational perspective (i.e. jump start my next book project!). Here are the first two sentences from the CFP:

The ideal of liberal education, long a mainstay of Western ideals of higher education, is suddenly under attack the world over. In country after country, the idea that higher education should aim primarily at the cultivation of the intellect and sensibility rather than at preparation for a particular vocation is being swept vigorously aside by more exclusively utilitarian understandings.


4. The Freedoms of Individuals v. The Freedoms of Religious Institutions

Janine Giordano Drake applies historical thinking to the topic at Religion in American History. Here's the big question: Can Catholic social service agencies have it both ways? Can a private, religious organization both manage social services on behalf of the public and also be immune from the checks and balances of that public which invested them with that worldly power?

And here's a taste of her conclusion: We’ve been through all this before. A hundred years ago, Catholics were protesting the overreaching power of Protestant schools, hospitals, and insurance companies in the civic realm. Protestants maintained that this was their “public witness,” even though Catholics held that nobody had the right to a public witness which overshadowed the right of others to follow their alternate Christian conscience.

Check it out.


5. The Minds Of Children and the Role Ideology in Children's Libraries

Writing for The Millions, Alan Levinovitz dissects the issues around the late twentieth-century, and early twenty-first, censorship of certain children's books. The occasion for the article is tomorrow's film opening of Dr. Seuss' The Lorax. In the course of reading the article I learned that Tim LaHaye published an iteration of his "Left Behind" for children (of which Levinotvitz rightly observes that the book has never been the object of a censorship drive by Left-leaning parents).

Lacy's Open Thread

A few unexpected book review arrivals, as well as some family summer sickness (it always _feels_ worse in the summer, yes?), have taken me off my game plan for today. Originally I had hoped to post Part IIIb of my series on common sense and M.J. Adler (last post here). It's still coming, next Thursday probably, but just not today.

Since necessity is the mother of invention (i.e. I have nothing substantial to put up), let's try something new: an open thread. I'll call it "Lacy's Open Thread" to personalize the effort---so you won't confuse it with Ta-Nehisi Coates' "Lost Battalion" series at his Atlantic blog (an effort that is clearly inspired me--hence the shout out).

To further personalize this post, here are a few conversation seeds:

1. Check out Nicholas Carr's reflections on Marshall McLuhan, here and here. I find Carr to be one of the most fascinating writers on the intersection of cognitive ability (or disability) and technology.

2. Here's an entry by Salon's Michael Lind in the "American exceptionalism" discussion.

3. Here's a Bookforum Omnivore blog entry on the intellectual status of the Left (in the world and in America).

At this point long-time readers may be wondering what is the difference between my "open thread" offering and my "light reading" series. First, I haven't actually read everything I've linked above (except the first McLuhan entry). Second, feel free to dismiss my seeds to talk about whatever you want.

So, what's on your mind? Something from the past, or the present? Historiography? The debt crisis? The heat wave? Your writing malaise? Boy/girl troubles? Chef Ramsey? Vacation planning?

I'm also open to a meta-level conversation on whether you think an "open thread" is a good or bad idea for USIH (e.g. starting it midsummer might be a bad idea, even if the overall notion is fine).

Take it away... - TL

---------------------------------------

Note: Here's a shameless, self-serving plug---If you havent' joined S-USIH, what are you waiting for? Send us your info and a check. At this point you may be asking what's in it for you? A newsletter (forthcoming)! Comradery! Pride! Partial entry into the USIH conference (participants must be S-USIH members). What else could you want?

Lacy's Open Thread

A few unexpected book review arrivals, as well as some family summer sickness (it always _feels_ worse in the summer, yes?), have taken me off my game plan for today. Originally I had hoped to post Part IIIb of my series on common sense and M.J. Adler (last post here). It's still coming, next Thursday probably, but just not today.

Since necessity is the mother of invention (i.e. I have nothing substantial to put up), let's try something new: an open thread. I'll call it "Lacy's Open Thread" to personalize the effort---so you won't confuse it with Ta-Nehisi Coates' "Lost Battalion" series at his Atlantic blog (an effort that is clearly inspired me--hence the shout out).

To further personalize this post, here are a few conversation seeds:

1. Check out Nicholas Carr's reflections on Marshall McLuhan, here and here. I find Carr to be one of the most fascinating writers on the intersection of cognitive ability (or disability) and technology.

2. Here's an entry by Salon's Michael Lind in the "American exceptionalism" discussion.

3. Here's a Bookforum Omnivore blog entry on the intellectual status of the Left (in the world and in America).

At this point long-time readers may be wondering what is the difference between my "open thread" offering and my "light reading" series. First, I haven't actually read everything I've linked above (except the first McLuhan entry). Second, feel free to dismiss my seeds to talk about whatever you want.

So, what's on your mind? Something from the past, or the present? Historiography? The debt crisis? The heat wave? Your writing malaise? Boy/girl troubles? Chef Ramsey? Vacation planning?

I'm also open to a meta-level conversation on whether you think an "open thread" is a good or bad idea for USIH (e.g. starting it midsummer might be a bad idea, even if the overall notion is fine).

Take it away... - TL

---------------------------------------

Note: Here's a shameless, self-serving plug---If you havent' joined S-USIH, what are you waiting for? Send us your info and a check. At this point you may be asking what's in it for you? A newsletter (forthcoming)! Comradery! Pride! Partial entry into the USIH conference (participants must be S-USIH members). What else could you want?

Tim's Light Reading (3/24/2011)

1. Google and the Ongoing Commodification of Knowledge

Nicholas Carr takes apart Google's view of Western/world history by acting like an intellectual historian. In a Rough Type post from a few days ago, Carr questions the Google team, as represented in statements made by Google's Chief Economist, Hal Varian, on its intellectual vision of knowledge---meaning how to search our increasingly digitized historical record to answer questions. Here are some excerpts and Carr's punchline (bolds mine):

History, in the Googley view, isn't about what people do; it's about what they output with the help of machines. Before 1700 you could see history everywhere except in the productivity statistics. ...

Maybe the question we should be asking, not of Google but of ourselves, is what types of questions the Net is encouraging us to ask. Should human thought be gauged by its output or by its quality? That question might actually propel one into the musty depths of a library, where "time saved" is not always the primary concern.

And, I might add, we should also acknowledge that some knowledge can't be commodified. [Aside: I think it's funny that Blogger.com doesn't understand "commodify" as a verb. Merriam-Webster online does, however.]

2. Hollinger on Ecumenical Protestantism in Modern America

HNN has done yeoman's work over the years (e.g. 2009, 2010, 2011) in bringing selected proceedings from major historical society meetings to the public. Of interest to intellectual historians, David Hollinger gave a talk at this year's OAH meeting entitled "After Cloven Tongues of Fire: Ecumenical Protestantism and the Modern American Encounter with Diversity." Here is HNN's recording of the talk in seven parts (1 hr, 7 minutes total). In the past years, intellectual history seems to have an HNN angel in relation to coverage because many intellectual history panels are covered and recorded. Kudos to HNN and Rick Shenkman!

3. Refereeing and Transparency

Eric Schliesser at the NEW APPS weblog advocates for more transparency in humanities and social sciences publication refereeing. Here's the gist of his argument:

Accepted, refereed papers and books should be accompanied with the name of the referees and, ideally, their reports, if only, in the online edition. (Note rejections can still be done anonymously.)

I think I like the idea of exposing the chain of recommendations in favor of breaking down "old boys and girls networks" across academe. This could have some interesting consequences in history. But I really like the idea of getting more important academic work recognized. Why shouldn't this legitimate work be incorporated into the tenure train? I'm interested in arguments opposed.

4. The New Issue of Modern Intellectual History

The April 2011 issue of Modern Intellectual History (Vol. 8, no. 1) holds forth several articles of interest to U.S. intellectual historians. Here's the TOC. I've already downloaded Andrew Jewett's article, "Canonizing Dewey: Naturalism, Logical Empiricism, and the Idea of American Philosophy." I also plan on reading Patrick Allit's review of the two new books on Ayn Rand (Burns and Heller). Finally, there is Richard F. Teichgraebe's article, titled "Beyond 'Academicization': The Postwar American University and Intellectual History." Thanks to Andrew J. Ballou for the head's up.

5. Scialabba on Phillipson's Adam Smith

Here is George Scialabba's review of Nicholas Phillipson's Adam Smith: An Enlightened Life. I recommend the review for what it says about modern conservative economic interpretations and appropriations of Smith. It's near the bottom of the review that Scialabba (and I) find Phillipson most useful in undermining popular perceptions about Smith's coherence in terms of market theory.

6. A New Book---Fantasies of the New Class: Ideologies of Professionalism in Post-World War II American Fiction

Yet another English Professor, Stephen Schryer at the University of New Brunswick, presents us with an intellectual and cultural history of America's late twentieth-century intelligentsia, this time through complex fiction. Here's the book's description from Columbia University Press:

America's post-World War II prosperity created a boom in higher education, expanding the number of university-educated readers and making a new literary politics possible. Writers began to direct their work toward the growing professional class, and the American public in turn became more open to literary culture. This relationship imbued fiction with a new social and cultural import, allowing authors to envision themselves as unique cultural educators. It also changed the nature of literary representation: writers came to depict social reality as a tissue of ideas produced by knowledge elites.

Linking literary and historical trends, Stephen Schryer underscores the exalted fantasies that arose from postwar American writers' new sense of their cultural mission. Hoping to transform capitalism from within, writers and critics tried to cultivate aesthetically attuned professionals who could disrupt the narrow materialism of the bourgeoisie. Reading Don DeLillo, Marge Piercy, Mary McCarthy, Saul Bellow, Ursula K. Le Guin, Ralph Ellison, and Lionel Trilling, among others, Schryer unravels the postwar idea of American literature as a vehicle for instruction, while highlighting both the promise and flaws inherent in this vision.

Enjoy! - TL

Tim's Light Reading (3/24/2011)

1. Google and the Ongoing Commodification of Knowledge

Nicholas Carr takes apart Google's view of Western/world history by acting like an intellectual historian. In a Rough Type post from a few days ago, Carr questions the Google team, as represented in statements made by Google's Chief Economist, Hal Varian, on its intellectual vision of knowledge---meaning how to search our increasingly digitized historical record to answer questions. Here are some excerpts and Carr's punchline (bolds mine):

History, in the Googley view, isn't about what people do; it's about what they output with the help of machines. Before 1700 you could see history everywhere except in the productivity statistics. ...

Maybe the question we should be asking, not of Google but of ourselves, is what types of questions the Net is encouraging us to ask. Should human thought be gauged by its output or by its quality? That question might actually propel one into the musty depths of a library, where "time saved" is not always the primary concern.

And, I might add, we should also acknowledge that some knowledge can't be commodified. [Aside: I think it's funny that Blogger.com doesn't understand "commodify" as a verb. Merriam-Webster online does, however.]

2. Hollinger on Ecumenical Protestantism in Modern America

HNN has done yeoman's work over the years (e.g. 2009, 2010, 2011) in bringing selected proceedings from major historical society meetings to the public. Of interest to intellectual historians, David Hollinger gave a talk at this year's OAH meeting entitled "After Cloven Tongues of Fire: Ecumenical Protestantism and the Modern American Encounter with Diversity." Here is HNN's recording of the talk in seven parts (1 hr, 7 minutes total). In the past years, intellectual history seems to have an HNN angel in relation to coverage because many intellectual history panels are covered and recorded. Kudos to HNN and Rick Shenkman!

3. Refereeing and Transparency

Eric Schliesser at the NEW APPS weblog advocates for more transparency in humanities and social sciences publication refereeing. Here's the gist of his argument:

Accepted, refereed papers and books should be accompanied with the name of the referees and, ideally, their reports, if only, in the online edition. (Note rejections can still be done anonymously.)

I think I like the idea of exposing the chain of recommendations in favor of breaking down "old boys and girls networks" across academe. This could have some interesting consequences in history. But I really like the idea of getting more important academic work recognized. Why shouldn't this legitimate work be incorporated into the tenure train? I'm interested in arguments opposed.

4. The New Issue of Modern Intellectual History

The April 2011 issue of Modern Intellectual History (Vol. 8, no. 1) holds forth several articles of interest to U.S. intellectual historians. Here's the TOC. I've already downloaded Andrew Jewett's article, "Canonizing Dewey: Naturalism, Logical Empiricism, and the Idea of American Philosophy." I also plan on reading Patrick Allit's review of the two new books on Ayn Rand (Burns and Heller). Finally, there is Richard F. Teichgraebe's article, titled "Beyond 'Academicization': The Postwar American University and Intellectual History." Thanks to Andrew J. Ballou for the head's up.

5. Scialabba on Phillipson's Adam Smith

Here is George Scialabba's review of Nicholas Phillipson's Adam Smith: An Enlightened Life. I recommend the review for what it says about modern conservative economic interpretations and appropriations of Smith. It's near the bottom of the review that Scialabba (and I) find Phillipson most useful in undermining popular perceptions about Smith's coherence in terms of market theory.

6. A New Book---Fantasies of the New Class: Ideologies of Professionalism in Post-World War II American Fiction

Yet another English Professor, Stephen Schryer at the University of New Brunswick, presents us with an intellectual and cultural history of America's late twentieth-century intelligentsia, this time through complex fiction. Here's the book's description from Columbia University Press:

America's post-World War II prosperity created a boom in higher education, expanding the number of university-educated readers and making a new literary politics possible. Writers began to direct their work toward the growing professional class, and the American public in turn became more open to literary culture. This relationship imbued fiction with a new social and cultural import, allowing authors to envision themselves as unique cultural educators. It also changed the nature of literary representation: writers came to depict social reality as a tissue of ideas produced by knowledge elites.

Linking literary and historical trends, Stephen Schryer underscores the exalted fantasies that arose from postwar American writers' new sense of their cultural mission. Hoping to transform capitalism from within, writers and critics tried to cultivate aesthetically attuned professionals who could disrupt the narrow materialism of the bourgeoisie. Reading Don DeLillo, Marge Piercy, Mary McCarthy, Saul Bellow, Ursula K. Le Guin, Ralph Ellison, and Lionel Trilling, among others, Schryer unravels the postwar idea of American literature as a vehicle for instruction, while highlighting both the promise and flaws inherent in this vision.

Enjoy! - TL

Tim's Light Reading (1/21/2011)

1 (of 5). How Does Technology Change Our Thinking Patterns?

Nicholas Carr might be the best thing going for discussions on how technology, particularly the internet, influences the way we think. Check out this podcast at his blog, Rough Type, where he attempts a brief (Western) intellectual history of way that maps, mechanical clocks, and the printed book have changed our modes of perception and apprehension. Carr is perhaps best known for a bestselling book titled The Big Switch: Rewiring the World, from Edison to Google. None of this is earth-shattering by itself, except in that Carr has been taking lessons from the past and applying them to internet. Is anyone else doing better, or equal, than Carr in terms of reflecting on how the internet is reworking our minds?

2. What Is Jürgen Habermas' Significance To U.S. Intellectual Historians?

Courtesy of Brian Leiter's Reports, I learned that a new biography on Jürgen Habermas is out. Authored by Matthew Specter, Peter E. Gordon reviewed the book at The New Republic. Leiter believes Habermas' importance as a philosopher is overstated, but thinks that Gordon (and Specter) get Habermas' role as a public intellectual about right. The comments on the Leiter thread are of interest. I'm not knowledgeable enough about Habermas to confirm or deny statements about his importance or unimportance. And no graduate or undergraduate class of mine required Habermas, either as a book or excerpted (which amazes me). Nevertheless, I have a copy of The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society on my shelf. Apparently, however, that book is more historical than philosophical, and therefore should be of interest to intellectual historians. What is the significance of Habermas to you? Or why should he be of interest to intellectual historians?

3. New Periodical: The Journal For The History Of Analytical Philosophy

Here's the site. I found these lines from the journal's self-description to be of interest (bolds mine): "JHAP takes the history of analytical philosophy to be part of analytical philosophy. Accordingly, it publishes historical research that interacts with the ongoing concerns of analytical philosophy and with the history of other twentieth century philosophical traditions."

4. Who Is The "Americanized Heidegger"?

Courtesy again of Brian Leiter, I learned that there is a distinction in the literature between Martin Heidegger's significance in Europe versus the United States---aside from the distinction between his philosophy and personal failings (i.e. Nazism). Leiter introduces this distinction in the context of discussing a 1999 BBC documentary on Heidegger (49 minutes, Richard Rorty makes an appearance). But I suspect that we intellectual historians would be better served by tackling Martin Woessner's new book, Heidegger in America (Cambridge, 2010). Here's the blurb from the Cambridge site:

The German philosopher Martin Heidegger was one of the most influential and controversial thinkers of the twentieth century. Offering a novel account of Heidegger's place in the recent history of ideas, Heidegger in America explores the surprising legacy of his life and thought in the United States of America. As a critic of modern life, Heidegger often lamented the growing global influence of all things American. But it was precisely in America where his thought inspired the work of generations of thinkers – not only philosophers but also theologians, architects, novelists, and even pundits. As a result, the reception and dissemination of Heidegger's philosophical writings transformed the intellectual and cultural history of the United States at a time when American influence was itself transforming the world. A case study in the complex and sometimes contradictory process of transnational exchange, Heidegger in America recasts the scope and methods of contemporary intellectual and cultural history in the age of globalization, while challenging what we think we know about Heidegger and American ideas simultaneously.

5. A New Philosophy of History?

Christopher Shannon appropriates Alasdair MacIntyre's idea of tradition to introduce a new "approach to the study of the past" in the January 2011 issue of Historically Speaking. I'm eager to check this out. Have any USIH readers read the essay already? The same issue offers responses from Mark Weiner, Daniel Wickberg, and Elisabeth Lasch-Quinn---as well as a final rejoinder from Shannon. Aside: I love the dialectical presentation of topics in each HS issue. Mortimer Adler would've appreciated it. :) - TL

Tim's Light Reading (1/21/2011)

1 (of 5). How Does Technology Change Our Thinking Patterns?

Nicholas Carr might be the best thing going for discussions on how technology, particularly the internet, influences the way we think. Check out this podcast at his blog, Rough Type, where he attempts a brief (Western) intellectual history of way that maps, mechanical clocks, and the printed book have changed our modes of perception and apprehension. Carr is perhaps best known for a bestselling book titled The Big Switch: Rewiring the World, from Edison to Google. None of this is earth-shattering by itself, except in that Carr has been taking lessons from the past and applying them to internet. Is anyone else doing better, or equal, than Carr in terms of reflecting on how the internet is reworking our minds?

2. What Is Jürgen Habermas' Significance To U.S. Intellectual Historians?

Courtesy of Brian Leiter's Reports, I learned that a new biography on Jürgen Habermas is out. Authored by Matthew Specter, Peter E. Gordon reviewed the book at The New Republic. Leiter believes Habermas' importance as a philosopher is overstated, but thinks that Gordon (and Specter) get Habermas' role as a public intellectual about right. The comments on the Leiter thread are of interest. I'm not knowledgeable enough about Habermas to confirm or deny statements about his importance or unimportance. And no graduate or undergraduate class of mine required Habermas, either as a book or excerpted (which amazes me). Nevertheless, I have a copy of The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society on my shelf. Apparently, however, that book is more historical than philosophical, and therefore should be of interest to intellectual historians. What is the significance of Habermas to you? Or why should he be of interest to intellectual historians?

3. New Periodical: The Journal For The History Of Analytical Philosophy

Here's the site. I found these lines from the journal's self-description to be of interest (bolds mine): "JHAP takes the history of analytical philosophy to be part of analytical philosophy. Accordingly, it publishes historical research that interacts with the ongoing concerns of analytical philosophy and with the history of other twentieth century philosophical traditions."

4. Who Is The "Americanized Heidegger"?

Courtesy again of Brian Leiter, I learned that there is a distinction in the literature between Martin Heidegger's significance in Europe versus the United States---aside from the distinction between his philosophy and personal failings (i.e. Nazism). Leiter introduces this distinction in the context of discussing a 1999 BBC documentary on Heidegger (49 minutes, Richard Rorty makes an appearance). But I suspect that we intellectual historians would be better served by tackling Martin Woessner's new book, Heidegger in America (Cambridge, 2010). Here's the blurb from the Cambridge site:

The German philosopher Martin Heidegger was one of the most influential and controversial thinkers of the twentieth century. Offering a novel account of Heidegger's place in the recent history of ideas, Heidegger in America explores the surprising legacy of his life and thought in the United States of America. As a critic of modern life, Heidegger often lamented the growing global influence of all things American. But it was precisely in America where his thought inspired the work of generations of thinkers – not only philosophers but also theologians, architects, novelists, and even pundits. As a result, the reception and dissemination of Heidegger's philosophical writings transformed the intellectual and cultural history of the United States at a time when American influence was itself transforming the world. A case study in the complex and sometimes contradictory process of transnational exchange, Heidegger in America recasts the scope and methods of contemporary intellectual and cultural history in the age of globalization, while challenging what we think we know about Heidegger and American ideas simultaneously.

5. A New Philosophy of History?

Christopher Shannon appropriates Alasdair MacIntyre's idea of tradition to introduce a new "approach to the study of the past" in the January 2011 issue of Historically Speaking. I'm eager to check this out. Have any USIH readers read the essay already? The same issue offers responses from Mark Weiner, Daniel Wickberg, and Elisabeth Lasch-Quinn---as well as a final rejoinder from Shannon. Aside: I love the dialectical presentation of topics in each HS issue. Mortimer Adler would've appreciated it. :) - TL