As distinguished from, say, his contributions to American thought and/or American life, which while important, great, and worthy, *is not the same thing* as his contributions to philosophy.
I think that distinction is too little made.
A treasonous sentiment, I suppose, among most "Deweyans". But I am not most Deweyans. Indeed I don't think that aspect of Dewey's work is essential to appreciating his most important contributions to philosophy and to pragmatism in particular.
...into what it is now, continuing its long process of lasting reform as opposed to revolution and trying to invent something new.
Not to say our way is perfect or even the best. This is all just by way of explanation of why Dewey's discussions of democracy have never much interested me.
...Canadian living within the British tradition of Westminster parliamentary government and constitutional monarchy, it seems to me a lot of the problems American democratic thought is intended to solve are self-imposed as a result of breaking from that tradition right before it began to develop...
I realized today that perhaps the reason I have less interest than I might otherwise in Dewey's thoughts about democracy is because I am not really committed to the specifically 'American democratic project' he's working within. I am a fervent believer in liberal democracy, but as a...
I'm delighted to have a piece, along with many friends, in this lovely open access collection. The volume is superbly edited by Yvonne Huetter-Almerigi and Robert Sinclair, as a birthday treat for Bjørn Ramberg. Happy Birthday, Bjørn! #philsky #nordic #pragmatism
nordprag.org/nordic-studi...
Correct!
But it's not.
In fact, it's a student of Dewey's. One who is also a major figure in analytic philosophy.
This quote is an excellent -- though small -- bit of evidence that there is such a thing as an analytic pragmatist who is a Deweyan.
Guesses welcome!
An image of text from a book.
Who does this sound like to you? If you said John Dewey, that's a very good guess.
With re-appearing day as now so happy and serene
The rosy and elastic dawn, the flashing sun
The limpid spread of air cerulean
-- Walt Whitman, "To the Man-of-War Bird"
Too many people confuse their commitment to certain political views, or elements of social critique, with a personality. When that's the case, you're not a person freely holding a view: you are letting a viewpoint dictate to you who you are.
"The things that make us human will become much more important instead of much less important."
Amen. Nice to hear this; that said, remains to be seen if actions will match words. Regardless, the more people say this, the better.
fortune.com/2026/02/07/a...
Some freeform Marcus Aurelius:
No escape from the rhythm of events
But also: Calm detachment from external events.
You don't have to turn this into something; it doesn't have to upset you.
Why be angry with the world? As if it would notice!
I hope these help you. If not, that's okay too.
I typed a Hegel quote from the Phenomenology into Word as part of some work I'm doing. The spelling/grammar/style checker highlighted part of it. Its advice?
"More concise language would be clearer for your reader."
Yeah, we know! Where were you in 1807?
These thoughts are not directed at any particular person, or topic, or recent experience. They have been percolating in me for a while, and this is their first expression.
Too many people confuse the intensity or extremity of an assertion with the strength of the committment to the value it expresses.
You might think that these are so obvious they hardly need stating. Except I see very smart people flout them all the time, especially on political or social topics.
So I think they do need stating; defending. In particular, that those principles are compatible with a commitment to strong values.
Thoughtfulness and care in expression, avoiding extremes without overwhelming evidence, not attributing to people views they clearly do not hold or it would be uncharitable to ascribe to them--these principles I firmly believe; they are at the heart of responsible reasonable discourse.
Here's the full image. AI can be fun; but let's not ignore the parts that are neither fun nor good for humanity. On that score I hope to have some writing done soon, both for my blog and, I hope, a journal article.
I've indulged myself in one of the few good uses of so-called "AI", and got it to generate a portrait of me as I might appear if I were an academic philosopher in the 1920s. I rather enjoy the results, and it is now my profile picture.
She also had an indelible influence on my Doktorvater & mentor, Mark Migotti, for whom she was a mentor, if not a Doktormutter. It pleases me that since my other mentor Bob Brandom's Doktorvater was Rorty, my philosophical grandparents are Haack & Rorty, two pragmatists who couldn't disagree more.
Very sad to hear of the passing of Susan Haack. I met her once, and remember her as delighfully mordant. I long admired her work. I think she was at her best when she deployed her razor sharp mind & clarity of thought in service of, in John McDowell's nice phrase, "piece[s] of mere sanity".
Examining the phenomena more closely we shall find that not a single element of moral conduct is unrepresented in reasoning. At the same time, the special case naturally has its peculiarities.
Indeed, that process is almost beautifully Hegelian itself, isn't it?
I have discovered this semester that I *love* teaching Hegel's _Phenomenology of Spirit_. Not only do I love the book itself, and the ideas therein, but there is something very satisfying about taking students from bewilderment to incipient understanding and on to, ideally, actual understanding.
"Democracy" and "Education", while very important to Dewey & his overall philosophy, have overshadowed the rest of his philosophical work to an outrageous degree. One of my philosophical missions in life is to rectify this; not to downplay those things, but to re-balance our view of Dewey's work.
Pleased to have contributed to this very fine collection of essays celebrating the centennial of Dewey's Experience & Nature in the journal Dewey Studies. My contribution is called "Culture as the Space of Conceptual Meanings: Re-Introducing Experience and Nature"
opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/dewey-studies/
Yes, I am aware that what I just did was apply a hermeneutics of suspicion to the hermeneutics of suspicion in order to criticize the hermeneutics of suspicion. I am not unaware of the irony. I have a hunch there's a wrinkle here that escapes self-refutation, but I haven't figured it out yet.
