2 thoughts on “Obama’s “Philosophical” Pragmatism”

  1. There are some phrases when used politically sounds bogus even from the moment they are first uttered. “Philosophical pragmatism” is one of those phrases though “qualitative easing”, especial when abbreviated “QE” strikes me as worse of the breed over the past couple of years.

    I don’t know how far back the phrase goes, but there’s this bizarre discussion about Obama philosophical proclivities here.

    When the Harvard historian James T. Kloppenberg decided to write about the influences that shaped President Obama’s view of the world, he interviewed the president’s former professors and classmates, combed through his books, essays, and speeches, and even read every article published during the three years Mr. Obama was involved with the Harvard Law Review (“a superb cure for insomnia,” Mr. Kloppenberg said). What he did not do was speak to President Obama.

    “He would have had to deny every word,” Mr. Kloppenberg said with a smile. The reason, he explained, is his conclusion that President Obama is a true intellectual — a word that is frequently considered an epithet among populists with a robust suspicion of Ivy League elites.

    Incidentally, I wonder if he had access to the academic stuff that Obama kept from the public. Doesn’t sound like he did.

    Anyway, what’s particularly bizarre here is the claim that there’s a somewhat secret Obama that this guy has a lock on, even though he never bothered to speak to the guy himself. This is a problem because politicians, by inclination and perhaps, necessity have many different masks. What Obama (or perhaps his ghostwriter(s)) has written may not reflect in the least what he actually believes nor his actual effect on humanity.

  2. The very heart of it all…

    At its most extreme, philosophical pragmatism denies the very existence of objective truth, arguing that opinions we declare true are merely those that have proved useful to one interest or another.

    At some point it’s just stupid to even argue with these idiots since they question the very foundation of rational thought.

    Truth is what they say it is and you’re an idiot if you think facts are stubborn.

    Stubbornness in the face of reality is their prime virtue.

Comments are closed.