Summary: An argument tracing the dissolution of Western society to the abandonment of philosophical realism for nominalism and what may be done to reverse that decline.

Many authors have traced the decline of the West (if there is such a thing) to the ideas that shape our culture. Few have argued that more trenchantly or been cited more often that Richard M. Weaver, an intellectual historian and professor of English at the University of Chicago during the mid-twentieth century. I’ve been aware of this book for over twenty years but just now have gotten around to it.

Weaver’s argument begins with the abandonment of philosophical realism, the existence of transcendent or metaphysical truth for nominalism, the denial of absolute universals but only the particulars of our existence. He then traces some of the ways this manifests itself. First he discusses the obliteration of the distinctions and hierarchies which constitute society for an egalitarian ideal. He then notes the fragmentation of modern societies. No longer capable of philosophy, we are reduced to facts without coherent structure. Without the transcendent, the self is the measure of value. Egotism is a word that runs through his discussion. When work is only about self-realization rather than being divinely ordained, work becomes a matter of getting the better of others rather than pursuing the common good. Art, as it becomes solipsistic, degenerates. Weaver saves his harshest criticism for the distinctly American music of jazz.

In the rejection of a transcendent metaphysic, moderns come up with a modern synthesis which Weaver calls “the great stereopticon” consisting of the trinity of the press, the motion picture, and the radio (television was just coming on the scene in 1948). These foster the fragmented, disharmonious experience of our lives, often distracting us from their banal character, a critique that seems to have anticipated Neil Postman’s, Amusing Ourselves to Death. All of this fosters in us a “spoiled child” psychology amid technological advances that believes in a material heaven easily achieved.

Weaver’s final three chapters address his proposed remedy–what must be done. First is to reassert and protect the right of private property, the only metaphysical right he believes has not yet been jettisoned in the four hundred year decline he traces. The extension of this from homes to businesses to agriculture preserves and restores volition and undercuts authoritarian tyrannies–whether capitalist or communist. He also argues for the power of the word, both poetic and logical, advocating for instruction in logic and rhetoric. Finally, he contends for restoration of “spirit of piety” with regard for nature, for one’s neighbors, and the past.

For me, what I would most criticize is his concern about distinctions and orders, that seem for him established on the basis of heredity and immutable characteristics, like gender. It felt like women, and perhaps the races must be kept in their places, an idea more in a Platonic rather than Christian metaphysic. It also makes me wonder whether Weaver would want to extend private property to all in society, or is arguing for the protection of the “haves.” I also don’t think much of his application of egotism to the arts, and especially to jazz, rooted in the laments of the blues, and the transcendent hope of the spirituals. I thought this deeply dismissive and a critique imposed from a superficial extension of his basic idea of egotism that little considers the actual work of the artists.

That said, his basic discussion of the consequences of the shift from realism to nominalism, from absolutes to relativism, particularly in the rise of fragmentation, exacerbated by the stereopticon of our media is worth our attention, prescient as it was in 1948. I find myself wondering whether his remedies of private property, the power of words, and the recovery of piety toward the earth, our neighbors, and history get us all the way back to life grounded in transcendent realities, from which he traces our decline. These seem more a holding action at best.

I also found this a challenging read in which the thread of argument gets buried in prose, sparkling at times, and obscuring at others. It felt like reading John Henry Newman–there is a great argument in here, somewhere! It’s an important work, especially for classic conservatives, that anticipates the thought of others. Just be ready for some work as you read it!

-

Before The Closing of the American Mind, there was Ideas Have Consequences. Nearly two decades before Bloom, Richard M. Weaver – rhetorician, Southern agrarian sage, and a founding father of the postwar conservative revival – published this spirited disquisition on the Western intellectual tradition.

Part jeremiad and part prescription, Ideas Have Consequences argues that the 14th-century “defeat of logical realism [by nominalism]…was the crucial event in the history of Western culture.” With philosophical realism undermined, the Western world gradually retreated from its belief in universals, first principles, and transcendent truths. Modern man, having rejected absolute truth and a teleogical understanding of the world, lives in the world of experience and mistakenly places his faith in the power of “endless induction” to make sense of reality.

Weaver’s interpretation of William of Occam and the universalism-nominalism debate is a question for medievalists and philosophers. But if you’ve ever wondered how moral relativism, equalitarianism, egotism, consumerism, collectivism, and the “dissolution of the West” are all related – or why private property, language, and religion are so crucial to the preservation of all that is good in our civilization --- read this book.

I found this book a real labor to read. I think if he were writing today, this book would be more straight-forward in style. I felt like the author lived in his head and peered down upon the rest of humanity. He made disparaging comments about American soldiers in World War II. So what was he doing while they were fighting? I think he was around 32 when America entered the war. At the same time, he makes many good points. I had to keep reminding myself that he is writing in 1948, because so much that he wrote seems more applicable today than it was when he wrote it. For instance, he has a chapter on the power of media to shape public perception. What he calls "The Great Stereopticon" was written before the average person had a television, let alone an ipod!

If only Weaver could see how horribly we've ignored his observations :/ There's some incredible clairvoyance in here, but our inability to prevent the progressive march of materialistic scientism has me doubting the adequacy of Weaver's proposed "solutions". I wish there was more power in these pages, to solve the issues that have been advancing since (supposedly) Occam... If only men weren't so propelled by the material these days.

This book is a pretty deep crimson red-pill, I gotta say. From a socialist leader to a conservative captain, Weaver's story and insight is pretty astounding.

I honestly wanna just re-read this right now, but it's pretty heavy stuff, and I need a minute. I almost feel like the language is so thick that it wouldn't be a bad idea to just work on translating it into a modern vernacular :P

A withering critique of modernity. By beginning with the denial of universals due to the school of Nominalism as founded by William of Occam in the Middle Ages, Weaver traces the comprehensive decay facing the West by no longer possessing the means for understanding its most important foundations.

This book hit the nail on the head. Page after page, I felt that Weaver (writing in 1948 at that!) was expressing, very articulately, frustrations I have with contemporary life that I couldn't put into words. For Weaver, it boils down to this: material progress is not what human souls need for happiness. Page after page, he preaches a conservative vision (but not in the modern "right-wing" sense) for recapturing an intellectual and spiritual life that leads to human thriving. My soul was enriched by this book.

The book is considered a classic, there are many more books that have been written since 1948 that say the same things better. Chapter 6 "The Spoiled-Child Psychology" is very good but other than that you don't need this book on your shelf.

Written in 1948, this book offers a prophetic account of how modernism will lead to the collapse of Western civilization. I freely admit I was lost on some points (dangers of jazz?), but overall this is one of the best books I have read. Weaver offers up counter actions to our predicament, primarily through resisting semantic manipulation, a liberal education, knowing our history, and securing private property. Sixty years later his positions are still valid; one could argue that stronger measures should be taken to save our collapsing culture.

Brilliant.

An amazing book, honestly. Many of the ideas propounded in the book, I had heard before and kind of taken as my own because they sounded right. However, this book explained the reasoning behind those ideas and really opened my eyes to what I had been blindly believing before. Equality is a bad thing, democracy is harmful, and Ideas do have consequences no matter how innocent they seem. This was the book that gave fuel to my senior thesis. It has proved invaluable and will continue to do so, I am sure. I do not agree with everything the author says but all of it is extraordinarily insightful.

Fascinating