Progress and Pragmatism: James Dewey, Beard, and the American Idea of Progress by David W. Marcell (review)

REVIEWS 359 mentof publichealthalmost toofaithfully.Asaresult,thereisnoexplicitemphasis onwhatisinmanyways themostchallenging question of publicpolicy impliedbythe historyof the departmentin the centurycovered.How did an areaof high-status activityandrealachievement - bothintellectual andadministrative - changeintoa far moremarginalenterprise intheworldofmedicine. It isasignificant incidentin a more generalshiftof socialprioritiesfrom the publicto privatesector.Within medicine itselfitreflects aparallelshiftinintellectual andsocial priorities fromsocial and environmental to individualandlaboratory-oriented concerns. It isa development ,moreover, consistent withchanges in manyotherareasof social policy, both relatedtomedicine(ashospitals), andmoregeneralconcerns (asin theuseof public space). A moreconsistent effort toseeNewYork'spublichealthstoryincomparative terms- thatisin comparison withotherAmericancommunities andperhapsforeign citiesaswell- mighthavemadea longbookevenlonger,but wouldhaveaddeda significantdimensionto its usefulness for socialand institutionalhistorians. Moreover,it mighthaveshedadditionallight on thisshiftin social priorities.But despitethesereservations, letmeemphasize thatweareallin Professor Duffy'sdebt forhaving theenergy andorganizational skilltoundertake andcomplete sovaluable a project. CHARLES E. ROSENBERG University ofPennsylvania Progress andPragmatism:James Dewey, Beard, andthe American IdeaofProgress. D^vIDW. M^RCELL. Contributionsin American Studiesno 9. Westport, Conn., Greenwood Press,•974. PP.xiv,4o2.$•3.95. Much hasbeenwritten aboutWilliamJames,John Dewey,and CharlesBeard in relationto the antiformalistpragmatic movementeversince•949 whenMorton G. Whitefirstopenedup thesubject. DavidW. Marcellgoesbackoverthesameterritory againin linkingthethreethinkerstoameliorismthattriedtotranscend thepolarity of rationalismand empiricism.His claimsfor advancingthe argument,however, unfortunatelyevaporate under scrutiny, and he isleft witha lucidand knowledgeablebookthatrehearses whatisalreadyknownandrepeatscriticisms alreadymade. Marcellbelieves thatheiscorrectinga failureto talkof the'positiveandconstructiveconsequences ' of Beard's revoltagainst positivism andthat'thepragmatic wayin whichBeardqualifiedhisrelativismhasscarcely beennoted'(32o).Marcelliswrong onbothcounts. In •9581examinedBeardasa'pragmatic relativist' whoemphasized 'the centralrole of plansand hopesfor future bettermentasdeterminantsof the historian's actof historical synthesis.' I specifically concluded that'thisrevoltagainst pseudoscience, finality,andformalism wasfundamentally creative,' evenif'it did not fully accomplish itsaims.'In •955 I emphasized the unrecognized extentto which antiformalists like Beard, Dewey,and Veblen had their own rationalism,derived from amodernrevivalandrevision of theEnlightenment's ideaof progress. Marcell eventuallyalwaysconcedes with one hand what he hasdenied with the other. He says Beard'scriticsfail to seethathe waswellawareof modernscientists 360 THE CANADIAN HISTORICAL REVIEW being'nolongercertainof thegroundonwhichtheystoodorof thetoolswithwhich theyworked'(266):The pointissupposed tocontrast withmyobservation thatBeard was'not sufficientlyaware'that modern scientists had abandonedthe dream of 'a universal system of over-arching laws.'Yet Marcellgoeson to observe that often 'Beard wasmistakenlyequatingscientific predictionwith absolute predestination' (28o),whichwasprecisely mypoint.Similarly,MarcellthinksBeardwasqualifying hisrelativismsignificantly by hisideaof civilization. But in hisviewthe historian succeeded by'anticipating thespiritofthecomingage,'whichhewronglyforecast as collectivist, democratic 'continentalism.' Even if Roosevelt had followed Beard's prophecy, however,the forecast wouldhaveprovidedno leverage for validating narratives aboutthepast.In theendMarcellconcedes theimportantpointbynoting thatBeard'frequentlylostsightof thedistinction betweenpositive, verifiedknowledgeof the pastandprospective conditional knowledge of thefuture'(33o).His historical philosophy remained 'nothingmore'than'anindividual actoffaith'(332). That iswhatBeard'scritics havebeensayingfor aquarterof acentury. On mostmattersof factMarcellisscrupulously accurate, andsoit ispuzzlingto findhimciting'thelogical rigorof Peirce'as'thestrongest single influence' (• 57)on Jameswhosegenialdisrespect for logicwasa sentiment wornonhissleeve. Nor isit fair to Henry Adamsasa reformerto saythat'oneglimpse of thesordidmachinationsof Grantismhad shatteredhis resolve,and he had quicklywithdrawnto contemplatein silencethe serenityand order of medievalhistory'(259). On the contrary,evenafter the disenchanted Democracy (•88o) he continuedto work on behalfof independentRepublicanreformers.Theseareuncharacteristic errorsin a bookwhosefaultsareof anotherorder- returningfrom avisitto familiarterritory with 'news' that is old. CUSHING STROUT Cornell University On ActiveService in War and Peace:PoliticsandIdeology in theAmerican Historical Profession. jEssE LE•ISCH, withanIntroductionbyThomasSchofield. Toronto, New HogtownPress,•975. PP.viii, •5o.$3.oo. OnActive Service in WarandPeace isanimportant historicaldocumentfor tworeasons. First,it isan indexto thecrisisamongAmericanhistorians caused by Vietnam. As such, itispartofthedebate overtheroleofhistory asaninstrument fornurturingthe ColdWar consensus or for presentinga radicalcritiqueof capitalist society. It thus maybeassessed astheproductof anessentially political struggle amongprofessional historians. Second, it isaventurein historiography whichimputesaclearbiasto the writingof Americanhistoryin recenttimes.It thusmaybeevaluated ashistoryand notsimply aspolitics. The mainbodyof thebookisapaperbyJesse Lemisch preparedfor deliveryatthe •969 meetingof theAmericanHistoricalAssociation in Washington, I)C,andoriginallyentitled 'Present-Mindedness Revisited: Anti-Radicalism asaGoalof American Historical Writingsince WorldWar II.' The paperwassubmitted toandrejected by ...