Allan Bloom’s writing, like a deep breath of cold air, was aggravating yet surprisingly refreshing. While disagreeing with most of what he thought and wrote, it was refreshing to read an absolutist who vigorously and intelligently sought after universal truths. I agree with Bloom’s observation of apathy, which seems to have plagued both our generation and those which have followed. The inspiration to seek the light at the end of the cave seems lost. Universal truths found in religious texts, or told to the masses from positions of authority, seem only loosely accepted and not fiercely sought out. I am not saying that the truths found in these contexts are wrong, only the motivation to find and to adhere to these truths seems lacking. (I am not on a soapbox as I am guilty of such apathy.) Bloom blames the relativist for the spreading of indifference. Although I would identify myself, and my future teaching practices, most closely with interpretivism, which in practice has relativistic properties, I regretfully agree with Bloom.
Bloom would have been very upset with our interpretivist centered class discussion. Having to rely on interpretation and not a universal law, in his opinion, (sorry if I am putting words in your mouth Mr. Bloom) would deteriorate into apathy. While I believe that an interpretivist may have a tendency to fall prey to apathy, it is not a necessity. I believe if interpretivism is strongly adhered to, apathy will not be an outcome. The interpretivst acknowledges the uniqueness of every situation, striving to attain the “greater good” of specific circumstance. Interpretivists’ must not lose vigor, and strive for the highest degree of truths and rights in every given circumstance. Not striving to attain the best and most moral practice in every circumstance will lead to an apathetic lifestyle. Attributing a universal law to every given circumstance would also lead to apathy. Hard-sought interpretivism, while it accepts that the world is not black and white, still strives to attain the “white” in every situation and leads to a wide awakening of the once apathetic.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
It seems like bloom's thoughts and interpretive theorist stand as far apart from each other as possible. I have to say that Blooms's ideas were limited to his own interpretation of things; what he thought was the "right way". From what I have gathered, this is exactly what interpritivists don't agree with. I agree with you and bloom that we've become too open to everything but it was some of Bloom's over simplistic solutions or remedies that he provided us with that I would have to disagree with.
An excellent post!
Post a Comment