![]() John Dewey and The Philosopher's Taskreviewed by Michael Glassman - 2003 ![]() Author(s): Philip W. Jackson Publisher: Teachers College Press, New York ISBN: 0807741655, Pages: 119, Year: 2002 Search for book at Amazon.com Philip Jackson performs a valuable service (actually more than
one) in his new book John Dewey and The Philosopher’s
Task.The philosophical baseline of this book is an exploration
of Dewey’s conception of “experience” as
presented in one of his most important (Jackson says it may be the
most important) philosophic renderings, Experience and
Nature. The exploration of this concept takes on a
literary quality, foreshadowed in the title, because Dewey wrote
four versions of the introductory chapter to this book. There
is an inherent mystery in this, why four versions of a chapter that
is supposed to explain perhaps Dewey’s most basic
concept? Why did a philosopher of such deep convictions feel
the need to revise and revise yet again, until he determined to
replace the very word he held so closely in his work,
“experience”, with the word
“culture?” Within these obvious mysteries Jackson
finds more subtle questions. What exactly did Dewey see as
the philosopher’s task? And how did he reconcile his
admiration for the simple beauty of the scientific method with his
own desire to describe and engage in the far messier philosophic
method? As I look back on my own experience in reading this
book I am amazed at the scope of questions Jackson is able to raise
in so slim a volume. Jackson begins his book by reviewing the initial version of the
first chapter of Dewey’s Experience and Nature.
This book, and especially its first chapter, is presented as the
apogee of Dewey’s search for a philosophical description of
experience. Dewey’s task is made that much more
difficult by the juxtaposition of an incredibly complex concept
with an incredibly common word to describe it. ( It helps if
the reader already has some knowledge of the history of
experience in Dewey’s work - pointing to the fact that
this book is not really appropriate for Dewey neophytes.)
Dewey realized he had caught lightning in a bottle prior to the
turn of the century when concrete practices (such as the
development of his laboratory school) and relationships (such as
the one he developed with Jane Addams) helped him to combine the
organicism of his mentors (e.g., George Morris) with his new found
passion for realism in the single active concept of human
experience. Prior to the publication of Experience
and Nature the concept was always central to Dewey’s
thinking but never defined in a manner that could easily avoid
misperceptions or even purposeful misuse. Jackson shows, in his first chapter, how Dewey was able to
define, in a very certain manner, exactly what he meant by
experience. Jackson’s succinct and eloquent
explanation of Dewey’s definition works on two levels.
First, it shows the cohesiveness and consistency of Dewey’s
work leading up to this point. Second, it sows the seeds of
discontent that would fester in Dewey’s soul as a result of
his own definition. Whatever peace of mind Dewey might have
found from his successful philosophical denouement of one of his
core (if not the core) philosophical concepts was short
lived. Dewey was back at work less than four years later
completely rewriting this first chapter. The important
question that Jackson asks is why, especially considering his
success in defining such a “slippery” concept, was
Dewey not satisfied? Why was he never
satisfied? This is the mystery that Jackson follows through the remainder
of his book. The second chapter of Jackson’s book is a
very concrete comparison of the first version of the introductory
chapter to Experience and Nature with the second
version. He actually presents a chart showing differences in
the amount of times key phrases were used. If you look
carefully it is possible to see the difficulty that will plague
Dewey for the next two decades, a difficulty that will become
clearer with each succeeding chapter as Jackson (in true Dewey
fashion) moves from the concrete to the reflective. It is a
problem embedded in Dewey’s distinction between the
scientific method and the philosophical method. Dewey must
admit that experience in the scientific method is superior
for the discovery of tools, concepts, and ideas that are
instrumental in human life. At the same time Dewey is not a
scientist. He is a philosopher. It is a task he has
chosen with eyes wide open. Dewey chooses to be the
philosopher because he wants to have an impact on society; he wants
to address problems in a way that will lead to a better
world. Scientists are trapped within the rigor of their
scientific method. Even in the best of circumstances they
find what they find and are then swept up by the tides of
history. It is the philosopher who, using one of
Dewey’s favorites metaphors, develops the maps for
society. There is poignancy in the story Jackson lays out before us in
his book. Jackson comments that Dewey was very sure of his
ideas, that you do not see him struggle in his writings the way
that you see other philosophers struggle with ideas. And yet
it is possible to see, with each succeeding chapter of
Jackson’s book, that Dewey struggled with the concept of
scientist verse philosopher in his own life. My first reading
of this book suggests this is why he went back to this first
chapter so often. Dewey was a very smart human being who
understood and respected the scientific method as well as
anybody. He could have been a great scientist. Yet
science could not offer him what he desired in his experience, it
is not, as Jackson puts it, “melioristic in intent” (p.
59) to the degree that philosophy is. Great science often
times does not overtly aim at being of value to society. The
scientific method is trapped, to a certain degree, by its own
rigors. So Dewey is willing to suffer the pinpricks of a
thousand lost arguments. He is willing to cast himself into
the ocean of ideas (Dewey’s penchant for nautical terms is an
important part of Jackson’s book.) allowing for “drift
and hang” of his various positions: all this in the service
of a better world. Jackson’s afterward is especially powerful in what it says
about Dewey, but also more subtly about his own work in this
book. Dewey was moving in a direction throughout his career,
but never towards any particular port. He trusted his
experience to carry him forward. He knew the philosophic
method would never give him rest. To stretch the ship
metaphor a bit further (than either Dewey or Jackson might like) he
was a “Flying Dutchman”upon the seas of the world,
always looking for answers, scientific certainty always beyond his
intellectual grasp. Jackson starts with a specific question
about why Dewey was never satisfied with that most important of
chapters, but in the mirror of his subject allowed experience to
overwhelm him and take him on an intellectual journey. This
makes for an extraordinary book that leaves the reader in the same
“hang and drift” mode as subject and author. As I
started my second read of Jackson’s book I realized that I
was developing a different picture of Dewey, and of Jackson’s
interpretation of him, a picture that moves in the same
direction but with an ending I can’t predict. It is a
book and an experience I believe I will return to many
times. Postscript: Today I read an article about how the
Bush administration was determined to base all reading funding on
science. “Don’t they realize?” I
screamed to no person. “Teaching reading is more
philosophy than science.” I thought about Dewey and how
his ideas remain so brutally relevant. I thought about
Jackson and how he has tried to keep Dewey’s ship a
sail. ReferenceDewey, John. 1986. Experience and Nature (revised
edition). Open Court Publishing Company: New York.
|