Skip to main content

Solidarity Forever!



Image result for Goldman Emma

Celebrating tomorrow, Labor Day, let's sing the song together.

And then let's think about that fervent communist, Emma Goldman, who once wrote as follows:

"There is no greater fallacy than the belief that aims and purposes are one thing, while methods and tactics are another. This conception is a potent menace to social regeneration. All human experience teaches that methods and means can never be separated from the ultimate aim. The means employed become, through individual habit and social practice, part and parcel of the final purpose; they influence it, modify it, and presently the aims and methods become identical."

My Disillusionment in Russia (1923).

Comments

  1. Impressive. I didn't know that Emma Goldman she became disillusioned with the revolution, and as early as 1923. And she’s right that “aims and purposes are one thing”: they’re synonyms. So are “methods and tactics” and “methods and means.” Her writing is redundant and repetitive and reiterative.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "Emma Goldman she" in my prior comment was an unintentional redundancy. In the context of my comment, it's funny.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'm happy to defend Goldman as a stylist. Redundancy is not necessarily a bad thing. Sometimes it just adds emphasis in a way that is EASIER ON THE EYES THAN THE NOW UBIQUITOUS CAPITALIZATION! Sometimes it's in an accepted catch phrase, and even goes unnoticed, as in the redundancy of "part and parcel," which Goldman also used above.

    More generally, synonyms have different shades of meaning, and the redundancy has the effect of embracing both shades. With "methods and tactics," for example, the word "tactics" has localist connotations from its military use. A General uses "strategy" in choosing his battles, but uses "tactics" on the specific battlefield once fighting has begun.

    Had Goldman used "strategy and tactics" the military connotations would have seemed a bit blatant. She substituted "method" for "strategy," so the military significance of "tactics" is still there, but more subtle.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majesti

Five Lessons from the Allegory of the Cave

  Please correct me if there are others. But it seems to be there are five lessons the reader is meant to draw from the story about the cave.   First, Plato  is working to devalue what we would call empiricism. He is saying that keeping track of the shadows on the cave wall, trying to make sense of what you see there, will NOT get you to wisdom. Second, Plato is contending that reality comes in levels. The shadows on the wall are illusions. The solid objects being passed around behind my back are more real than their shadows are. BUT … the world outside the the cave is more real than that — and the sun by which that world is illuminated is the top of the hierarchy. So there isn’t a binary choice of real/unreal. There are levels. Third, he equates realness with knowability.  I  only have opinions about the shadows. Could I turn around, I could have at least the glimmerings of knowledge. Could I get outside the cave, I would really Know. Fourth, the parable assigns a task to philosophers

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak