Book review: John Dewey’s Liberalsim by Daniel M. Savage

In my readings about liberal philosophy, I had settled on John Rawls as the cutting edge. His description of liberalism seemed to be the most commonly accepted among modern liberals, and it defined the lines of debate on the subject. I didn’t always agree with Rawls, but I thought his ideas had merit and were workable. Rawls’s arguments included the commonly accepted dichotomies between individual vs. community, liberty vs. equality, and rights vs. majority rule.

Daniel Savage’s book lays out the philosophy of John Dewey, which provides an entirely different approach to liberalism. Dewey saw the disagreements between liberals and communitarians as pseudoproblems, and attempted to describe a form of liberalism that utilized the common ground between the extremes.

The liberalism of Dewey is more of a process than a set of conclusions. He begins with a justification of liberalism based on self-improvement, rather than on the traditional arguments surrounding individual rights. Self-improvement is seen as the end of life, and liberalism is the means. A liberal society is one that permits individual self-improvement. To do so, rights are necessary. Unlike libertarian liberals, Dewey did not see persons as atomized individuals isolated from community. As Savage puts it, "Cultural context furnishes the starting point for a quest for the good life by providing individuals with moral orientation." (pg. 12)

Of course, appealing to culture as an influence on morals raises the question of how much influence the culture should exert. If the quest for the good life becomes nothing more than conformity to social norms, there can be no self-improvement. Conformists substitute the thoughts and opinions of others (the community, a church, a dictator) for their own. Self-improvement requires autonomy, which Dewey did not equate with individualism. An autonomous person will be one who makes his own decisions based on his experience and reason. Culture, though, will always provide the context in which those choices will be made. The conflict between individual and culture is a false dichotomy, Savage writes. They cannot escape each other, and it is impossible to study one without knowledge of the other.

The book compares Dewey’s ideas with the most prominent liberal and communitarian philosophers, since much of the debate appears to be between liberalism and communitarianism. He challenges Immanuel Kant’s categorical imperative as inadequate to resolve most moral dilemmas. He also challenges the absolutization of beliefs and the rigidity of conformist societies. “The greatest obstacle to the creative innovation of individuality is the absolutization of existing institutions, rules, and norms.” (pg. 65) For self-improvement, there must be some room for creativity. Liberal societies will establish institutions that encourage critical reflection and autonomy. Freedom will permit creativity and the testing of new ideas, while culture will provide the context for creativity and prevent it from descending into meaningless eccentricity.

Savage compares Dewey’s method for self-improvement to the scientific method. It is an apt comparison. Dewey describes critical reflection and autonomy as a way to test ideas and solve problems. The answers that liberalism delivers will change to confront new problems, just as the scientific method restructures theories to include new facts. Dewey shunned universal rules, but the liberal method of testing ideas was a sort of universal. “… The universal must supply a method of practical moral reasoning rather than an abstract rational rule." (pg 21)

Dewey’s liberalism enumerates a few “oughts”, but it also attempts to explain the “is”. Society does not advance and adapt as smoothly as liberalism suggests that it could. Dewey refers to this as “cultural lag”. (pg. 8) Why do societies hold on to outdated beliefs and norms? Doing so prevents them from meeting to new challenges, which ultimately causes harm. “One reason is that some members of society are invariably advantaged by the status quo and so do not wish to see change.” (pg. 8). A similar dynamic was articulated by Thorstein Veblen. The conservative adherence to tradition stifles the societal improvements that operate like Darwinian evolution. A liberal society is pragmatic. It looks for what works, and it continually tests new ideas for their ability to solve modern real-world problems.

The scope of Dewey’s liberal philosophy, as analyzed by Savage, encompasses more than just politics. It also includes art and poetry, education, personal virtues, science and culture. They are not seen as necessarily separate and unrelated entities. All are tools in the tool belt, by which the individual engages in his quest for the good life. John Dewey’s Liberalism is thoughtfully written, and takes a fair survey of opposing viewpoints. As a political philosophy, it has the potential of breaking down some of the self-imposed barriers between the factions of liberal thought. It has given me a new direction to explore.

© 2008 Bryan Lower

Feedback: