Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T10:32:58.041Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sense and Nonsense in Politics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2022

Marvin Surkin
Marvin Surkin*
Affiliation:
Adelphi University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

I take my cue for the title of this paper from Merleau-Ponty, the French phenomenologist, who wrote in 1948 that “the political experience of the past thirty years oblige us to evoke the background of non-sense against which every universal undertaking is silhouetted and by which it is threatened with failure.” Merleau-Ponty refers to the experience of that generation of intellectuals for whom Marxism was a “mistaken hope” because it lost “confidence in its own daring when it was successful in only one country.” But this criticism is equally relevant for a new generation of intellectuals in America for whom the ideals of liberalism have been emptied of reality and have become little more than a super-rational mystique for the Cold War, a counter-revolutionary reflex in the third world, and a narrow perspective of social welfare at home. Merleau-Ponty argues that Marxism “abandoned its own proletarian methods and resumed the classical ones of history: hierarchy, obedience, myth, inequality, diplomacy, and police. Today intellectuals in America are making the same critique with equal fervor about their own lost illusions.

As we search for new ways to comprehend the social realities of American life and new modes of social thought and political action to reconstruct “the American dream,” Merleau-Ponty's notion of sense and nonsense guides us to see the historical relationship between ideologies and practice, between thought and action, between man and the world he creates. It symbolizes that recurrent fact in history whereby reason parades as unreason, where even “the highest form of reason borders on unreason.” We must learn from recent history that “the experience of unreason cannot simply be forgotten;” that the most noble claims to universal truth, the most rational modes of philosophical or social inquiry, the most convincing declarations of political leaders are all contingent, and should be subject to revision and open to criticism and change.

Type
Research Article
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 2 , Issue 4 , Fall 1969 , pp. 573 - 581
Copyright
Copyright © The American Political Science Association 1969

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

To appear in The Caucus Papers: Essays in the New Political Science, edited by Alan Wolfe and Marvin Surkin, to be published by Basic Books in 1970.

I want to thank the Hwa Yol Jung for suggesting the title and also for making available to me his unpublishe' paper, “Existential Phenomenology and Political Theory.”

References

1 Sense and Nonsense (Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1964), p. 4.

2 Ibid.

3 Ibid.

4 Ibid.

5 Ibid., p. 5.

6 American Power and the New Mandarins (New York: Pantheon Books, 1969).

7 See McCoy, Charles and Playford, John, eds., Apolitical Politics: A Critique of Behavioralism (New York: Thomas Y. Crowell, 1967).Google Scholar

8 See Peter Bachrach and Morton S. Baratz, “The Faces of Power,” in ibid.

9 See Bachrach, Peter, The Theory of Democratic Elitism: A Critique (Boston: Little, Brown, 1967).Google Scholar

10 See Wormuth, Francis, “Matched-Dependent Behavioralism: The Cargo Cult in Political Science,” Western Political Quarterly, Vol. 20 (Dec. 1967), pp. 809–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

11 Rockman, Bert, “A ‘Behavioral’ Evaluation of the Critique of Behavioralism.” Unpublished.Google Scholar (Presented for the Caucus for a New Political Science, American Political Science Association Convention, September, 1969.)

12 Ibid., p. 40.

13 Though I agree, I am not at all sure how one goes about determining the point at which science begins and ideology leaves off.

14 Rockman, op. cit., p. 41.

15 Ibid.

16 “Meaning and Verification,” in Feigl, Herbert and Sellars, Wilfrid, eds., Readings in Philosophical Analysis (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1949), pp. 146–170.Google Scholar

17 Gelman, David and Kempton, Beverly, “The Trouble with Newspapers: An Interview with Murray Kempton,” The Washington Monthly, Vol. 1, no. 3 (April 1969), p. 26.Google Scholar

18 Cited in Chomsky, op. cit., p. 36.

19 Cited in Chomsky, ibid., p. 49.

20 Pool, Ithiel de Sola, “The Necessity for Social Scientists Doing Research for Governments,” Background, Vol. 10 (August 1966), p. 111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

21 Bell, Daniel, “Notes on the Post-Industrial Society: Part I,” The Public Interest, No. 6 (1967), p. 24–35.Google Scholar

22 Brzezinski, Zbigniew, “America in the Technetronic Age,” Encounter, Vol. 30 (Jan. 1968), pp. 16–26.Google Scholar

23 Moynihan, Daniel P., Maximum Feasible Misunderstanding (New York: Free Press, 1969).Google Scholar

24 Moynihan, Daniel P., “The Professors and the Poor,” Commentary Vol. 46, no. 2. (August 1968), p. 28.Google Scholar

25 Ibid.

26 Rainwater, Lee and Yancey, William, eds., The Moynihan Report and the Politics of Controversy (Cambridge: M.I.T. Press, 1967), p. 24.Google Scholar

27 Ibid., p. 42.

28 In a perceptive article, William Ryan criticizes The Moynihan Report for drawing inexact conclusions from weak and insufficient data; encouraging a new form of subtle racism which he calls “savage Discovery,” i.e., the belief that it is the weaknesses and defects of the Negro himself that account for the present status of inequality between Negro and white; and for interpreting statistical relationships in cause-and-effect terms. See “Savage Discovery: The Moynihan Report,” in ibid., p. 458.

29 “The Moynihan Report,” in ibid., p. 443.

30 The Moynihan Report, op. cit., p. 443.

31 William Ryan, op. cit., p. 465.

32 Look Out, Whitey! Black Power's Gon' Get Your Marnai (New York: Grove Press, 1968), p. 54.

33 Eulau, Hinz, The Behavioral Persuasion in Politics (New York: Random House, 1963), pp. 136–37.Google Scholar

34 Ibid., p. 9.

35 James, William, Principles of Psychology, Vol. 1, p. 227.Google Scholar

36 Gendlin, Eugene T., Experiencing and the Creation of Meaning (Glencoe: Free Press, 1962), p. 9 and 139.Google Scholar Cited by H. Y. Jung, op. cit.

37 “Forward,” in Merleau-Ponty, Maurice, The Structure of Behavior (Boston: Beacon Press, 1963), pp. xv–xvi.Google Scholar

38 Wormuth, op. cit., p. 816.

39 The Theory of Social and Economic Organization. (New York: Free Press), p. 88.

40 Merleau-Ponty, Maurice, Phenomenology of Perception (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1962), pp. viii and ix.Google Scholar

41 “Knowledge is Power,” The Nation, April 14, 1969, p. 458.

42 Graham, Elinor, “The Politics of Poverty,” in Gettleman, M. and Hermelstein, D., eds., The Great Society Reader (New York: Random House, 1967), p. 230.Google Scholar

43 Eulau, op. cit., p. 136.

44 Ibid., p. 135.

45 Ibid., p. 136.

46 Ibid., p. 136–7.

47 Ibid.

48 McDermott, op. cit.

49 A brief bibliography of the relevant major works of these authors is listed below. I omit Soren Kierkegaard for obvious reasons. Where available, English editions are cited.

Heidegger, Martin. Being and Time. (New York: Harper and Row, 1962).Google Scholar

Husserl, Edmund. Ideas. (New York: Collier Books, 1962.)Google Scholar

Husserl, Edmund. Die Krisis der Europaischen Wissenschaften… (The Hague, 1954.)Google Scholar

Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. Humanism and Terror. (Boston: Beacon Press, 1969.)Google Scholar

Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. Les Aventures de la dialectique. (Paris: Gallimard, 1955.)Google Scholar

Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. Phenomenology ot Perception. (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1962.)Google Scholar

Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. In Praise of Philosophy. (Evanston: North western University Press, 1963.)Google Scholar

Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. The Primacy of Perception. (Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1964.)Google Scholar

Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. Sense and Nonsense. (Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1964.)Google Scholar

Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. Signs. (Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1964.)Google Scholar

Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. The Structure of Behavior. (Boston: Beacon Press, 1962.)Google Scholar

Sartre, Jean-Paul. Being and Nothingness. (New York: Philosophical Library, 1956.)Google Scholar

Sartre, Jean-Paul. Critique de la raison dialectique. (Paris: Gallimard, 1960.)Google Scholar

Sartre, Jean-Paul. Literary and Philosophical Essays. (New York: Collier Books, 1955.)Google Scholar

Sartre, Jean-Paul. Search for a Method. (New York: Alfred Knopf, 1963.)Google Scholar

Schutz, Alfred. Collected Papers, 3 vols. (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1962, 1964, 1966.)Google Scholar

Schutz, Alfred. The Phenomenology of the Social World. (Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1967.)Google Scholar

Wild, John. Existence and the World of Freedom. (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1963.)Google Scholar

50 Merleau-Ponty, , Humanism and Terror, p. xiv.Google Scholar

51 Merleau-Ponty, M., Sense and Nonsense, p. 79.Google Scholar

52 Merleau-Ponty, Maurice, In Praise of Philosophy (Evanston: Northwestern University Press), p. 50.Google Scholar

53 This formulation was suggested to me by Robin Blackburn.