• Log In

The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast

A Philosophy Podcast and Philosophy Blog

Subscribe on Android Spotify Google Podcasts audible patreon
  • Home
  • Podcast
    • PEL Network Episodes
    • Publicly Available PEL Episodes
    • Paywalled and Ad-Free Episodes
    • PEL Episodes by Topic
    • Nightcap
    • Closereads
    • Philosophy vs. Improv
    • Pretty Much Pop
    • Nakedly Examined Music
    • (sub)Text
    • Phi Fic Podcast
    • Combat & Classics
    • Constellary Tales
  • Blog
  • About
    • PEL FAQ
    • Meet PEL
    • About Closereads
    • About Pretty Much Pop
    • Philosophy vs. Improv
    • Nakedly Examined Music
    • Meet Phi Fic
    • Listener Feedback
    • Links
  • Join
    • Become a Citizen
    • Join Our Mailing List
    • Log In
  • Donate
  • Store
    • Episodes
    • Swag
    • Everything Else
    • Cart
    • Checkout
    • My Account
  • Contact
  • Mailing List

Nietzsche, Pragmatism and the Fact-Value Distinction

August 18, 2012 by David Buchanan 6 Comments

John Dewey on the cover of Time Magazine[From David Buchanan, frequent blog and Facebook contributor and participant in our ZAMM episode.  See if that doesn't make sense after reading this.]

Richard Rorty opened one of his talks by pointing out that as Europeans see it, Pragmatism is just what the Americans could get out of Nietzsche. This joke suggests that there are many similarities but American Pragmatism isn't as deep or as dark as the author of Ecce Homo. In Podcast Episode 61, the partially examined dudes and their guest, Jessica Berry of Georgia State, work hard to identify what Nietzsche is wagging his finger at, to identify the conception of truth that he's attacking. As I'll try to show, the Pragmatists attack this same conception of truth.

The pesky fact-value distinction has come up so often in recent podcast episodes that it could be turned into one of those drinking games wherein everyone has to take a shot whenever "fact" and "value" are mentioned in the same sentence or any time "is" and "ought" are opposed. There is an episode or two where playing this game would lead to a wicked hangover and a few episodes that would get you comfortably buzzed. (Feel free to play this game as you make your way through the rest of this post, dear reader.) The fact-value distinction comes up so often, I suppose, because it can act to derail any discussion of truth, morality and the good life. It's like you can't say much about Truth until you deal with that fundamental distinction.

Radical empiricists like William James, John Dewey and Robert Pirsig each mount an attack on the distinction itself.  In his book John Dewey, Robert Pirsig, and the Art of Living, David Granger says, "Dewey's main point is that the common belief in the separation of the domains of science and value is ultimately parasitic on a false separation of our cognitive and affective lives, the 'objective' and 'subjective' modes of our relations with the world." (Art of Living 77) This a central point for Pirsig as well. "Value is not at the tail-end of a series of superficial scientific deductions," he writes. "Value is at the very front of the empirical procession." (Lila 365) "Values," Dewey argues, "constitute a vital strand in the fabric of the full lived situation". (Art of Living 70)  In other words, they argue that values are an indispensable feature of our experience and are already present at the very roots of perception and thought.

All of these radical empiricists begin with a rejection of subject-object dualism and the correspondence theory of Truth, which says our subjective ideas are true insofar as they correspond to objective reality or represent things as they really are. On the correspondence view, morals and values aren't going to be fully real until somebody spots them under a microscope, detects them with a brain scanner or otherwise establishes them as "objectively" real.  Dewey, James and Pirsig's all take the view that subject-object dualism, as well as mind-body dualism and all other dualisms, are the products of thought and not pre-existing ontological realities. They are thought categories that we've carved out because they serve our interests, as Dr. Berry might say.

We don't discover the world's natural joints so much as we invent concepts like "inner" and "outer" as basic categories into which we sort our experience. These conceptual distinctions are secondary additions but they are very often mistaken as referring to mind-independent ontological realities that make experience possible. Dewey and James argue that experience itself is the primary empirical reality, that experience itself is the basic lifeworld in which we feel, think and act. The front edge of experience is what Robert Pirsig calls Quality, what William James calls Pure Experience and John Dewey calls it the Situational Whole. On this view, having an experience directly and immediately is to "know" the experience in the sense of basic familiarity, but this is distinguished from "knowing" in the conceptual sense.

The criticism of dualism is an opposition to objectivity as an epistemological or methodological stance. "There's this pseudo-scientific myth," Pirsig writes, "that when you're 'objective' you just disappear from the face of the earth and see everything undistorted, as it really is, like God from heaven. But that's rubbish." (Lila 32) As Granger notes, this pretense at objectivity is mocked as "methodological solipsism" and, my favorite, "immaculate perception". It's a bit like mocking the "myth of the given", but it's funnier. "Since reflection and inquiry always involve a purposive act of selection from within a larger situational whole, the fact-value distinction is bound to dissolve at some point," Dewey says, "and with it the supposed autonomy of facts and factual discourse."

Pirsig illustrates this point with an analogy wherein the situational whole, the immediate flux of experience itself, is like an endless landscape of awareness while our conceptual understandings are just a handful of sand which has been taken from that endless landscape. That handful has been selected, they argue, not simply given. The obvious implication is that conceptual or reflective consciousness is just the tip of the iceberg and we experience far more than we can deliberately ponder -or even consciously notice. Even for the hardest of hard-nosed physicist, there must be some body of "values or goods informing the scientist as to what constitutes meaningful avenues of inquiry, or even what sort of situations are experienced as problematic," Granger explains. "What is more, values are clearly necessary if inquirers are to establish the pertinent facts or data of analysis." (Art of Living 74) There is also a common sense point to be made here: scientists are people with moral obligations to their own particular practice (no cheating!) and to the larger society. "Both [Dewey and Pirsig] want us to understand that without values, no facts could exist." (Art of Living 74)

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

Filed Under: Misc. Philosophical Musings Tagged With: Friedrich Nietzsche, John Dewey, philosophy blog, Robert Pirsig, William James

Comments

  1. gavin gee-clough says

    August 19, 2012 at 5:59 am

    immaculate perception….gold

    Reply
  2. Vasili says

    August 19, 2012 at 11:17 am

    Franz Boas, father of American anthropology and a school of cultural relativism, famously stated the neo-Kantian creed that “the seeing eye is an organ of tradition.” Of course Boas was a resolute empiricist and had his start in natural sciences (physics and geography). His 1881 doctoral dissertation was on the color of seawater, which eventually led him to take interest in the effects of culture on human perception.

    Reply
  3. Scott Forster says

    August 19, 2012 at 2:35 pm

    This was really well explained and interesting.Thanks.

    Reply
  4. Bruce Adam says

    August 19, 2012 at 4:25 pm

    Great piece. Thanks. I’ll just add a quote, as a chorus of agreement from the cheap seats.

    “But when we realize , as a good artist does in practice, that in what we see around us, we ourselves are always present , and we are not mere ‘observers’ of what is outside us, our visual environment becomes in reality not merely something much nearer to the truth , but of far greater personal interest.”

    JBS Haldane. “The Philosophy of a Biologist” .

    That’s quite a sentence !

    Reply
  5. David Buchanan says

    August 20, 2012 at 1:32 pm

    Thanks for reading and commenting, gents.

    William James had a pithy and poetic way to put it. He said, if memory serves, “the human serpent is coiled over everything” and “we carve out everything”. Similarly, Pirsig says we “are participants in the creation of all things”. Of course these pithy conclusions can sound pretty strange unless they’re understood in context, unless they’re seen in opposition to disinterested objectivity or “immaculate perception”.

    Reply
    • Victor Mansella says

      February 1, 2013 at 4:14 pm

      Very nice assimilation of the ideas of the fathers of radical empiricism. I wasn’t aware that Dewey was among them. I need to read more of his work…all that i’ve read are of his ideas for pedagogical reform….where should I look for an in-depth explanation of this “situational whole”?

      Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Citizenship has its Benefits

Become a PEL Citizen
Become a PEL Citizen, and get access to all paywalled episodes, early and ad-free, including exclusive Part 2's for episodes starting September 2020; our after-show Nightcap, where the guys respond to listener email and chat more causally; a community of fellow learners, and more.

Rate and Review

Nightcap

Listen to Nightcap
On Nightcap, listen to the guys respond to listener email and chat more casually about their lives, the making of the show, current events and politics, and anything else that happens to come up.

Subscribe to Email Updates

Select list(s):

Check your inbox or spam folder to confirm your subscription.

Support PEL

Buy stuff through Amazon and send a few shekels our way at no extra cost to you.

Tweets by PartiallyExLife

Recent Comments

  • Fllamber on Why Non-Euclidean Geometry Does Not Invalidate Kant’s Conception of Spatial Intuition
  • Mark Linsenmayer on Ep. 325: Paul Grice on Meaning and Conversation (Part Two for Supporters)
  • Shep Solimine on Ep. 325: Paul Grice on Meaning and Conversation (Part Two for Supporters)
  • Jonathan Wood on Closereads: Emerson’s Oversoul (Part One for PEL Supporters)
  • Mark Linsenmayer on Ep. 232: Simone de Beauvoir’s “The Second Sex” (Part One)

About The Partially Examined Life

The Partially Examined Life is a philosophy podcast by some guys who were at one point set on doing philosophy for a living but then thought better of it. Each episode, we pick a text and chat about it with some balance between insight and flippancy. You don’t have to know any philosophy, or even to have read the text we’re talking about to (mostly) follow and (hopefully) enjoy the discussion

Become a PEL Citizen!

PEL Citizens have access to all podcast episodes, free access to podcast transcripts, guided readings, episode guides, PEL music, and other citizen-exclusive material. Click here to join.

Blog Post Categories

  • (sub)Text
  • Aftershow
  • Announcements
  • Audiobook
  • Book Excerpts
  • Citizen Content
  • Citizen Document
  • Citizen News
  • Close Reading
  • Closereads
  • Combat and Classics
  • Constellary Tales
  • Exclude from Newsletter
  • Featured Ad-Free
  • Featured Article
  • General Announcements
  • Interview
  • Letter to the Editor
  • Misc. Philosophical Musings
  • Nakedly Examined Music Podcast
  • Nakedly Self-Examined Music
  • NEM Bonus
  • Not School Recording
  • Not School Report
  • Other (i.e. Lesser) Podcasts
  • PEL Music
  • PEL Nightcap
  • PEL's Notes
  • Personal Philosophies
  • Phi Fic Podcast
  • Philosophy vs. Improv
  • Podcast Episode (Citizen)
  • Podcast Episodes
  • Pretty Much Pop
  • Reviewage
  • Song Self-Exam
  • Supporter Exclusive
  • Things to Watch
  • Vintage Episode (Citizen)
  • Web Detritus

Follow:

Twitter | Facebook | Google+ | Apple Podcasts

Copyright © 2009 - 2023 · The Partially Examined Life, LLC. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy · Terms of Use · Copyright Policy

Copyright © 2023 · Magazine Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in