3 Flavors of Liberalism: Rational, Romantic, Realist
Are noble 18th-century norms fit for 21st-century life? Especially when, as Yuval Harari says, liberalism’s “factual statements just don’t stand up to rigorous scientific scrutiny.”
18 September, 2017
Illustration by Julia Suits, The New Yorker cartoonist & author of The Extraordinary Catalog of Peculiar Inventions
<p dir="ltr"><span>1. All Americans are liberals. The Founders declared (original) liberalism the self-evident centerpiece of the American deal. Let me explain, while spotlighting three flavors of liberalism: rational, romantic, realist. </span></p> <p dir="ltr"><span>2. </span><span>Liberal </span><span>(from Latin for “noble”) first meant “befitting free </span><a href="http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=liberal&allowed_in_frame=0" target="_blank"><span>people</span></a><span>” ~1500, then "free from prejudice, tolerant” ~1700, favoring “freedom and democracy" ~1801, and opposing conservatism ~1832.</span></p> <p dir="ltr"><span>3. Historian Dennis Rasmussen discerns two Enlightenment liberalisms: “</span><a href="http://pllqt.it/25A5mw" target="_blank"><span>pragmatic</span></a><span>” and idealistic. Relabeling these “realist” and “rationalist” underscores unresolved strains in liberalism’s logic.</span></p> <p dir="ltr"><span>4. The rationalists were “highly </span><a href="http://pllqt.it/LtGl4k" target="_blank"><span>idealistic</span></a><span>” logic-loving axiomatic-system builders—Locke’s natural law contracts, Kant’s universal logical duties, Bentham’s greatest good for the greatest number.</span></p> <p dir="ltr"><span> </span></p> <p dir="ltr"><span>5. These rationalists fell “in love with </span><a href="http://bit.ly/2fsGSIg" target="_blank"><span>geometry</span></a><span>,” with a zeal akin to religious devotion. Although much empirically refutes rationalism, their mindset and faith mind-bogglingly </span><a href="http://bigthink.com/errors-we-live-by/future-history-will-puzzle-over-the-short-lived-reign-of-rationalism" target="_blank"><span>thrives</span></a><span>.</span></p> <p dir="ltr"><span>6. Realists, like Hume, Smith, Montesquieu, and Voltaire, were “critics of reason in the… Age of </span><a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=oPOnDgAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=infidel+philosopher&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiDtb6s9a7WAhWC1CYKHaAxDhIQ6wEILzAB#v=onepage&q=%22critics%20of%20reason%20in%20the%20so-called%20Age%20of%20Reason%22&f=false" target="_blank"><span>Reason</span></a><span>.” Seeing reason’s evident limits, they took a “more realistic, moderate, flexible” approach “grounded in experience and empirical observation …[not] abstract </span><a href="http://pllqt.it/1WM1e1" target="_blank"><span>standards</span></a><span>.” Liberal realists were quite conservative favoring “gradual, piecemeal reform.”</span></p> <p dir="ltr"><span>7. Hume called Locke’s contracts "implausibly </span><a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=KRH3AQAAQBAJ&q=romantic#v=snippet&q=%22hume%20opposes%20social%20contract%22%20%22foremost%22%20%22implausibly%20individualistic%22&f=false" target="_blank"><span>individualistic</span></a><span>" (imaginary “offers” you couldn’t refuse). </span><a href="http://bigthink.com/errors-we-live-by/is-economic-justice-in-our-nature" target="_blank"><span>Anthropologists</span></a><span>, </span><a href="http://bigthink.com/errors-we-live-by/did-paleo-economics-shape-our-moralities" target="_blank"><span>evolutionists</span></a><span> and </span><a href="http://bigthink.com/errors-we-live-by/you-are-by-nature-self-deficient" target="_blank"><span>parents</span></a><span> all know no alternative self-sufficient “state of </span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_nature#John_Locke" target="_blank"><span>nature</span></a><span>” really existed.</span></p> <p dir="ltr"><span>8. Kant’s high-concept abstractions can fail trivial tests. For instance, you shouldn’t lie to </span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical_imperative#Lying_to_a_murderer" target="_blank"><span>assassins</span></a><span> about a target’s whereabouts? Beware oddball geniuses who aspirationally project their rare rigor onto </span><a href="http://bigthink.com/errors-we-live-by/rationality-deficits-of-the-poor-of-the-rich-and-of-economists" target="_blank"><span>others</span></a><span>.</span></p> <p dir="ltr"><span>9. Bentham’s “pig </span><a href="http://pllqt.it/svWKtb" target="_blank"><span>philosophy</span></a><span>” confuses pleasure with </span><a href="http://bigthink.com/errors-we-live-by/heres-how-happiness-got-confusing-even-for-our-smartest-scientists" target="_blank"><span>happiness</span></a><span>. And fans of one-trick-minded calculus of consequences seem easily steamrolled, e.g., infamous “trolley </span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem" target="_blank"><span>problems</span></a><span>” derail with a loved-one at stake (see “relational </span><a href="http://bigthink.com/errors-we-live-by/economics-vs-fiction-on-human-nature" target="_blank"><span>rationality</span></a><span>”). </span></p> <p dir="ltr"><span>10. Yuval Harari’s big-picture patterns suggest the third kind, “romantic liberalism.” The core “liberal </span><a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=DczADQAAQBAJ&pg=PP196&dq=harari+Homo+Deus+%22supreme+authority%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjxo9PYrafWAhXF8CYKHcNnA9oQ6AEIKDAA#v=snippet&q=liberal%20package&f=false" target="_blank"><span>package</span></a><span>” turns our gaze obsessively “</span><a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=DczADQAAQBAJ&pg=PP196&dq=harari+Homo+Deus+%22supreme+authority%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjxo9PYrafWAhXF8CYKHcNnA9oQ6AEIKDAA#v=onepage&q=%22liberalism%20turns%20my%20gaze%20inwards%22%20%22obsessing%20about%22%20%22my%20feelings%22&f=false" target="_blank"><span>inwards</span></a><span>,” enthroning feelings as “the supreme source of </span><a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=DczADQAAQBAJ&pg=PP196&dq=harari+Homo+Deus+%22supreme+authority%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjxo9PYrafWAhXF8CYKHcNnA9oQ6AEIKDAA#v=onepage&q=supreme%20source%20of%20meaning&f=false" target="_blank"><span>meaning</span></a><span>” and authority.</span></p> <p dir="ltr"><span>11. Romantic liberalism's creed has its own “bible of </span><a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=DczADQAAQBAJ&pg=PP196&dq=harari+Homo+Deus+%22supreme+authority%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjxo9PYrafWAhXF8CYKHcNnA9oQ6AEIKDAA#v=snippet&q=%22do%20what%20feels%20good%22%20%22novel%20Emile%22%20%22bible%20of%20feeling%22%20%22rules%20of%20conduct%22%20found%20%22in%20the%20depths%20of%20my%20heart%22&f=false" target="_blank"><span>feeling</span></a><span>,” Rousseau’s 1762 novel </span><em>Emile</em><span>, which preaches always trust your feelings (motto = “If it </span><a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=DczADQAAQBAJ&pg=PP196&dq=harari+Homo+Deus+%22supreme+authority%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjxo9PYrafWAhXF8CYKHcNnA9oQ6AEIKDAA#v=snippet&q=%22if%20it%20feels%20good%22%20do%20it&f=false" target="_blank"><span>feels good</span></a><span>, do it”). </span></p> <p dir="ltr"><span>12. Note art’s role as way-of-life preacher. As Wilfred Pareto said, "The most universal religion of the West… is the sex religion; the novel supplies… its </span><a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=PmwfH7X-IKAC&printsec=frontcover&dq=ian+watt+the+rise+of+the+novel&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiSt9i0lOHVAhUHWSYKHSBADxYQ6AEIKzAA#v=snippet&q=%22The%20most%20universal%20religion%20of%20the%20West%22%20%22is%20the%20sex%20religion%22%20%22the%20novel%20supplies%20it%20with%20its%20doctrine%20and%20its%20rituals%22&f=false" target="_blank"><span>doctrine</span></a><span>.”</span></p> <p dir="ltr"><span>13. Idea-faith and cognitive-style issues abound. For instance, free-market-obsessed neoliberalism mixes rationalism and romanticism, but lacks </span><a href="http://bigthink.com/errors-we-live-by/few-maximize-most-muddle-modelling-the-few-misleading-math" target="_blank"><span>realism</span></a><span>. The neoclassical versus behavioral economics struggle rests on realer rationality limits (see Adam Smith was a behavioral </span><a href="http://bigthink.com/errors-we-live-by/adam-smith-was-a-behavioral-economist-and-no-fan-of-greed" target="_blank"><span>economist</span></a><span>, and “behavioral </span><a href="http://bigthink.com/errors-we-live-by/on-behavioral-politics-and-islamic-exceptionalism" target="_blank"><span>politics</span></a><span>“).</span></p> <p dir="ltr"><span>14. Life-shaping ideas demand regular realistic reassessment, not blinkered (enlightened-seeming) faith. As philosopher Anna Alexandrova notes, liberal faith that “only the individual is an authority on their own well-being… flies in the face of </span><a href="http://pllqt.it/olxwma" target="_blank"><span>facts</span></a><span>.” </span></p> <p dir="ltr"><span>15. Harari agrees, "science is undermining… the liberal </span><a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=DczADQAAQBAJ&pg=PP196&dq=harari+Homo+Deus+%22supreme+authority%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjxo9PYrafWAhXF8CYKHcNnA9oQ6AEIKDAA#v=snippet&q=%22science%20is%20undermining%20the%20foundations%20of%20the%20liberal%20order%22&f=false" target="_blank"><span>order</span></a><span>." Liberalism’s “factual statements just don’t stand up to rigorous scientific </span><a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=DczADQAAQBAJ&pg=PP235&dq=homo+deus+factual+statements+just+don%E2%80%99t+stand+up+to+rigorous+scientific+scrutiny&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiD9s6uuq_WAhXp54MKHQhZCQMQ6AEIKDAA#v=onepage&q=%22factual%20statements%22%20%22just%20don%E2%80%99t%20stand%20up%20to%20rigorous%20scientific%20scrutiny%22&f=false" target="_blank"><span>scrutiny</span></a><span>.” For instance, individualism is a “WEIRD” sampling </span><a href="http://bigthink.com/errors-we-live-by/economics-vs-fiction-on-human-nature" target="_blank"><span>error</span></a><span> (with art-configured </span><a href="http://bigthink.com/errors-we-live-by/individualism-human-natures-software" target="_blank"><span>ups-and-downs</span></a><span>), presuming true inner selves risks the “fundamental attribution </span><a href="http://bigthink.com/errors-we-live-by/can-these-old-paths-show-new-ways-to-see-ourselves-less-weirdly" target="_blank"><span>error</span></a><span>,” and feelings often </span><a href="http://bigthink.com/errors-we-live-by/science-is-catching-up-to-the-buddha" target="_blank"><span>mislead</span></a><span>. </span></p> <p dir="ltr"><span>16. "New technologies kill old gods and give birth to </span><a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=DczADQAAQBAJ&pg=PP196&dq=harari+Homo+Deus+%22supreme+authority%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjxo9PYrafWAhXF8CYKHcNnA9oQ6AEIKDAA#v=snippet&q=%22new%20technologies%20kill%20old%20gods%20and%20give%20birth%20to%20new%20gods%22&f=false" target="_blank"><span>new gods</span></a><span>," says Harari. Likewise sacred ideas. </span></p> <p dir="ltr"><span>17. Are noble 18th-century norms fit for 21st-century life (when corporations can hack your </span><a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=DczADQAAQBAJ&pg=PP196&dq=harari+Homo+Deus+%22supreme+authority%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjxo9PYrafWAhXF8CYKHcNnA9oQ6AEIKDAA#v=snippet&q=technology%20outsmart%20%20feelings&f=false" target="_blank"><span>feelings</span></a><span> with addictive “</span><a href="http://bigthink.com/errors-we-live-by/video-games-powerful-emotech" target="_blank"><span>emotech</span></a><span>”)?</span></p> <p><span> </span></p> <p><em>Illustration by <a href="http://juliasuits.net/" target="_blank">Julia Suits</a>, </em><span>The New Yorker</span><em> cartoonist & author of </em><span>The Extraordinary Catalog of Peculiar Inventions</span></p>
Keep reading
Show less
Popular
