Comments on: Particularism http://larison.org/2007/07/10/particularism/ n. the principle of good order "Observe the strange inversion of all order and sense! Dignity debased; how vilely is the function of a consul prostituted!" ~The Craftsman Wed, 08 Feb 2012 23:00:05 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.4 by: jimvkruse http://larison.org/2007/07/10/particularism/#comment-7263 Wed, 11 Jul 2007 16:14:34 +0000 http://larison.org/2007/07/10/particularism/#comment-7263 I don't think Wolfe has any idea that when paleocons talk about the value of diversity and particularism, they're talking about ideosycrasies among white, European Christians and immigrants who have joined their communities and assimilated to community norms. Huge groups of foreigners who refuse to assimilate is not at all what they had in mind. I don’t think Wolfe has any idea that when paleocons talk about the value of diversity and particularism, they’re talking about ideosycrasies among white, European Christians and immigrants who have joined their communities and assimilated to community norms. Huge groups of foreigners who refuse to assimilate is not at all what they had in mind.

]]> by: Carter http://larison.org/2007/07/10/particularism/#comment-7252 Wed, 11 Jul 2007 02:17:32 +0000 http://larison.org/2007/07/10/particularism/#comment-7252 "One might even call it an irritated gesture" Nice one. I think a part of Wolfe's hostility is that he's one of those types who dislike anyone who is actually interesting. Also, have you ever seen <a href="http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20040901faresponse83515/samuel-p-huntington-alan-wolfe/credal-passions.html" rel="nofollow">this exchange</a>? “One might even call it an irritated gesture”

Nice one.

I think a part of Wolfe’s hostility is that he’s one of those types who dislike anyone who is actually interesting.

Also, have you ever seen this exchange?

]]> by: Daniel Larison http://larison.org/2007/07/10/particularism/#comment-7245 Tue, 10 Jul 2007 23:59:45 +0000 http://larison.org/2007/07/10/particularism/#comment-7245 Perhaps I was a bit terse in putting it this way. There is no question that revelations occur in time and are mediated through the cultures of the people receiving the revelation. This is an important point, and one I failed to emphasise here. This is another reason why religious revelation is very much unlike an ethical or political universalism. The important point here is to emphasise the difference between ideologies that claim universality--and are proven wrong--and religious teachings that claim to be the fullness of truth and available to all. The word "universal" often throws a lot of people off. I remember that this problem came up in my Christian ethics class back in undergraduate days: how could MacIntyre object to the universalism of the Enlightenment, when Christianity claims to be "universally" true? My observation then was that Christianity does not claim to be true independent of history, tradition and human experience. Rather, its truth is revealed through these things. Christian revelation claims absolute validity, but it is not claiming it in the way that ideologies do. Perhaps I was a bit terse in putting it this way. There is no question that revelations occur in time and are mediated through the cultures of the people receiving the revelation. This is an important point, and one I failed to emphasise here. This is another reason why religious revelation is very much unlike an ethical or political universalism. The important point here is to emphasise the difference between ideologies that claim universality–and are proven wrong–and religious teachings that claim to be the fullness of truth and available to all.

The word “universal” often throws a lot of people off. I remember that this problem came up in my Christian ethics class back in undergraduate days: how could MacIntyre object to the universalism of the Enlightenment, when Christianity claims to be “universally” true? My observation then was that Christianity does not claim to be true independent of history, tradition and human experience. Rather, its truth is revealed through these things. Christian revelation claims absolute validity, but it is not claiming it in the way that ideologies do.

]]> by: Consumatopia http://larison.org/2007/07/10/particularism/#comment-7244 Tue, 10 Jul 2007 23:47:51 +0000 http://larison.org/2007/07/10/particularism/#comment-7244 I'm probably misunderstanding you, and I have no doubt that you're right with regards to Wolfe and Kirk, but I found this line puzzling: <blockquote>Revelation will be applicable to all times and places, since it comes from God, Who is eternal and immaterial. </blockquote> How could this be true? If you clearly and distinctly perceive God revealing something to you, and you come tell me about it, then I have no way of knowing whether you've generally perceived God or just imagined Him, except perhaps a guesstimate of your credibility and sanity. The source of revelation may be eternal and immaterial, but the revelations themselves seem to be deeply rooted in time, place, culture, and society. If anything, that should only help your case for religiously-rooted particularism. I’m probably misunderstanding you, and I have no doubt that you’re right with regards to Wolfe and Kirk, but I found this line puzzling:

Revelation will be applicable to all times and places, since it comes from God, Who is eternal and immaterial.

How could this be true? If you clearly and distinctly perceive God revealing something to you, and you come tell me about it, then I have no way of knowing whether you’ve generally perceived God or just imagined Him, except perhaps a guesstimate of your credibility and sanity. The source of revelation may be eternal and immaterial, but the revelations themselves seem to be deeply rooted in time, place, culture, and society. If anything, that should only help your case for religiously-rooted particularism.

]]>