- Philosophy Americana: Making Philosophy at Home in American Culture
In Philosophy Americana, Douglas Anderson attempts to address “issues that arise in popular culture” (ix). He does so by drawing almost exclusively on issues that arise within his own experienced popular culture: a fairly limited, white, male, middle-class and country western perspective. He warns us of these limitations and believes a second, more inclusive volume may be forthcoming. Anderson further recognizes the perspective given to be a dominant and often privileged one, but argues that engaging this perspective should “be undertaken precisely because we often forget that ours is only one dimension of ‘America’” (7). While he does have some success at resisting the dangers of being “self-serving or even maudlin,” the essays at times look to be fairly “self-engrossed” (9). He successfully argues, however, that we cannot start from nowhere, as Dewey also emphasized, and thus reminds the reader that our own experience is a good starting point; but Anderson falls shy of his hope for inclusiveness and further admits to the narrowness of the volume.
Philosophy Americana is a collection of essays by a single author. The book begins by considering philosophy’s current impact on our culture. Anderson sees philosophers popularly portrayed as “insane angels.” Philosophers are dubbed thus because they want to transform not simply themselves, but their culture. Philosophy, understood this way, is “an important medium of transformation.” Inspired by Dewey, Anderson asks philosophers to avoid the trap of thinking themselves to [End Page 82] be “theoreticians.” We, philosophers, are more than this; we are “theoretically oriented practitioners” (16). Knowing that some of the founders of pragmatism, like Dewey, worked outside of the academy, Anderson believes pragmatism’s impact on our culture is much bigger than the reader might think (20). However, Anderson only references William James and John Dewey, neglecting, in this reviewer’s mind, the vast impact of Jane Addams, an omission too common when reflecting on the history and impact of pragmatism. It is an omission, moreover, made more significant by the masculine perspective of the book.
This same chapter, however, argues that philosophers have been made irrelevant to today’s “ordinary American” because they have “produced little or nothing that speaks directly” to them (3). “We [philosophers] blame the audience for their inattention” (4). Anderson does admit we are to blame. Looking at philosophy today, he notes our lack of community from within and our marginalization from without (48). In chapter 2, Anderson claims that we need to fight against our current troubles by reclaiming our sense of community within our profession as well as in the larger society. He suggests we meet our culture half-way. What is omitted here, though, is a consideration of the widespread habits of the “ordinary American.” In fact, most chapters in Philosophy Americana could benefit from a more thorough treatment of Dewey’s writings on habits, found especially in works like Human Nature and Conduct (1922) and The Public and its Problems (1927).
In chapter 4, “Working Certainty and Deweyan Wisdom,” Anderson attempts to find some middle ground between idealism and Dewey’s pragmatism. While there are “working stabilities,” these are not certainties. Anderson argues that we require faith, “an act of commitment and hope,” in order to act in this world (71). Yet it is misleading to call such an act a working certainty. While we do place our faith in and commit to certain beliefs in order to act, no beliefs are beyond question, beyond dispute, totally fixed. Dewey finds no need to praise a reliance on working certainties since they are a part of our lives and thus shape our future. Instead, Dewey’s focus is on the importance of recognizing such habits so that careful inspection and revision occur as change necessitates. Given the strong force such certainties play in our lives, Dewey emphasizes our fallibility and the continuously changing nature of life. Anderson unsuccessfully argues that Dewey’s understanding of wisdom—as good judgment in...