Critical Comments on Alan loom’s "The Closing of the
American Mind"
Prof. Stephen Palmquist,
D.Phil. (Oxon)
Department of Religion and Philosophy
Hong Kong Baptist University
Bloom's now-famous manifesto for the salvation of American academia ("Back
to the classics!") is worthy of serious consideration. His appraisal
of current trends, such as the tendency to move away from theoretical
traditions and towards practical or technical degrees, is often
penetrating. (A good example is his discussion of the MBA degree:
the degree itself is unobjectionable; but the value modern society places on it is a reflection of the "values" of modern
society--values which have a destructive side to them.)
Unfortunately, his style leaves alot to be
desired: the book is filled with sweeping generalizations, little
"pearls of wisdom" and "quotable quotes", based on ...
what? We are rarely told. Based appa-ently on one man's experience. Yet he
pronounces them as if they are unquestionably true. This may be an
intentional rhetorical device. But his comments often lack one of the
first criteria of good philosophy: reasons! (See, e.g., his
criticisms of the "toothless" sociologists (p.216), the
"psychology without a soul" (p.175), and numerous other cute, but
poorly defended quips (e.g. pp.178, 191).) Perhaps his purpose is merely
to paint a picture of the current American scene. An artist is
allowed to be intentionally subjective. But remember, "art is to hide art": art tends to hide "the
other side of the story".
The book's main theme is expressed in a nutshell on p. 34: "Our
openness means we do not need others. Thus what is advertised as a great
opening is a great closing." This is one of a myriad of neat
sounding phrases, which give the impression of being profound, but which are
very misleading, because their meaning remains too ambiguous. If Bloom
regards himself as a prophet, then this ambiguity is probably
intentional. Prophets usually talk about what might happen in the
future as if it is already happening; this very fact gives the recipients the
chance to change their ways. In a sense the American concern for openess may indeed be a "closing".
However, does this mean there is nothing good about this American love
of openess? Such extreme statements (which
Bloom seems to enjoy making) can be counterproductive, and usually hide
as much as (or more than) they reveal.
His criticism of the "structure" of the university, for example, says
plenty about what's wrong with the system, but precious little about the
far more important issue of how to improve it. What he does say remains
very vague: is the solution really to be found merely in imitating
Plato's friendly conversations (pp. 380-382)? He had the golden
opportunity to make some creative suggestions about what could be done to solve
the dilemmas he reveals. But he settles for platitudes.
Bloom's quasi-religious attitude towards academic
pursuits (p.245), and his idea of the "theoretical life" as a
philosopher's salvation from the perils of the modern situation, are
particularly misguided. For instance, he cites Kant (pp.290-291) as
someone who supposedly saw a great divide between theory and practice, and who
supposedly recognized the supreme value of living "the theoretical
life". Yet this just isn't true! Kant recognized before he
ever wrote his great works that the philosopher's task largely consists of
understanding and defending what the common man already knows and believes.
The subjective character of Bloom's whole argument is most evident in his failure
to look beyond his own institution at currently existing alternatives.
Although his description of students' attitudes and beliefs are
surprisingly applicable to Hong Kong students, he ignores the immense diversity
of educational methods elsewhere in the world. In universities
such as Oxford and Cambridge (where, incidentally, Bloom's view of the classics
is largely upheld, apparently undisturbed by the upheavals of the 1960's),
academics would hotly dispute Bloom's apparent assumption that education is
already dead everywhere but in America!
In general Bloom's book makes me appreciate my Westmont education.
Whether or not he is right about the current crisis in American liberal
education I am not qualified to judge, since I've lived outside America for
eight years. However, many of his criticisms seem wide of the mark if
taken to include the kind of education Westmont gave in the 1970s.
This etext is based on a prepublication draft of the published
version of this essay.
Send comments to: StevePq@hkbu.edu.hk
My Web Counter identifies you as visitor number
to this page, last
updated on 29 March 2011. Please come again!
Back to the listing
of Steve Palmquist's published articles.
Back to the main map of Steve Palmquist's web site.