Michael Bérubé Responds

 

Michael Bérubé responds to the critique of What's Liberal About Liberal Education? that I contributed to the Valve symposium on his book. He found my refrain "and that's why we call it power/knowledge" completely irritating. I guess it is--maybe that's why I found it kinda amusing (as well as cheap way to hang stuff together).

Jodi Dean generously reviewed What’s Liberal? two weeks ago, both at her own blog, I Cite (which is much more cleverly named than mine, I must admit) and via cross-posts at Long Sunday and The Valve.  It’s one of the more stringent reviews the book has gotten, and one of the very few theoretical discussions of the book to date.  But like the cliché says, on most points we’re simply speaking different languages.  And so I’ll have to say a few words about incommensurability.

Read his whole response if you have a chance. And the comments. Michael was particularly kind and generous in response to an attack raised by a denizen of faucets and pipes.

Comments

[Rich Puchalsky]

Following the trackback -- I note that the only "denizen of faucets and pipes" commenting in that thread, to my knowledge, was me. The guy who you thanked Michael for responding well to was someone with screen name "rich", who wasn't me. I always sign my comments Rich Puchalsky.

But maybe you meant that he was particularly kind and generous in response to my comment? Well, perhaps.

[pebird]

Where is Kotsko when we need him?

[Jodi]

Sorry, then, I thought it was you, Rich.

[pebird]

Jodi:

I have to hand it to Berube - he gave your post very serious thought and makes a number of v. good points.

While there is a lot of "I said/she said" instead of "liberalism is this, leftism is that", I appreciate the pride of ownership when a book is published and the importance of establishing a public position.

I also admire his stand on The Sokal Affair, and Aronowitz is certainly a leftist.

I do think Berube was flippant to Lenin's Tomb on the "we are all Hamas" thing. Seeing where Lebanon and the Palestinians are today, being Hamas may not be enough to stave off extinction.

And I have to say I find it discouraging when someone of the caliber of Berube has to fight again the likes of Horowitz. It's like Ali fighting Barney Fife - while it's fun to watch, why do we even have to witness this slaughter?

And I don't have any real problem with Berube's characterization of the "Monty Python" left - while I don't think he was using a broad brush to paint I Cite with that color, some of his regular readers may have picked up an unintended reference.

But I think the telling phrase of the entire post is:

"And that’s why I argue that although we cannot resolve incommensurabilities, we should try to understand what is at stake in them: "...

Leftists think you CAN resolve incommensurabilities, but it's not a pretty picture getting there. The resolution is called revolution and understanding (between the parties) isn't in that equation. (Not that I am calling for anything at this time, and I'm not).

But you can't teach revolution in school, and I understand that even being slightly liberal in universities is personally risky. Berube is on the front line of those battles (fighting well-funded morons, I certainly couldn't do it) and he is doing a incredible job. In fact he encourages the brunt of criticism onto himself and that is commendable.

Finally, his contrast with the Benson/Christian Scientist post is insightful. What a conflict! Do liberals really have moral dilemmas when faced with a Christian Scientist's sick minor daughter? We are watching way too much television. Leftists would not only treat the minor, they would treat the damn Christian Scientist too (I do love House, by the way).

[Michael Bérubé]

Hi, Jodi! Actually I didn't find the refrain "completely irritating," just "kinda annoying," which is few degrees milder. And I debated for a while about whether to say so, because I didn't want to sound like I was starting off a long post with a bit of pique. But I decided to admit to being kinda annoyed after all, partly to make the point I learned from my friend Amanda Anderson's revisionary takes on Habermas -- namely, that a commitment to communicative reason (not synonymous with a commitment to liberalism) need not rule out every kind of affect.

And thanks again for reading the book. It really was kind of you.

[Dominic]

"Leftists think you CAN resolve incommensurabilities, but it's not a pretty picture getting there. The resolution is called revolution and understanding (between the parties) isn't in that equation."

I don't think it's really *resolution* that's on offer, then, is it? More like dissolving the situation in which those particular incommensurabilities arise (and most likely replacing them with some different ones; I'd run screaming from any leftism that thought it could do away with incommensurabilities altogether...)

[pebird]

We are very fortunate to live in a place where in commensurabilities don't force us to face facts. It's truly a privilege to be here.

I guess I’m just a romantic at heart.

[will]

http://chronicle.com/temp/reprint.php?id=xlm4pkq5ydg5q54x71kwg4spprg1qc4n