The Catholic Book Club discussion
This topic is about
Return to Order
Return to Order
>
What is the cause of the Decline of the West
date
newest »
newest »
Mod
I don't have any more time this morning, but I look forward to discussing this issue over the course of the month.
Mod
I agree with this. You are right that everything started with Descartes, who broke with Aristotelianism. But Descartes, besides being a philosopher, was a mathematician, so although he was no longer Aristotelian, he remained a realist.
In the field of philosophy, in Great Britain, began a very different world view, a philosophical current that has received the generic name of English empiricism. Its main representatives were:
• Thomas Hobbes, best known for his political philosophy.
• John Locke, who denies the existence of innate ideas (in which Descartes did believe), and presents the human mind as an empty space where knowledge accumulates through experience, which is acquired through the senses, although in his view there are two kinds of sensations: primary, which are real, and secondary, which are subjective
• George Berkeley goes one step further. He asserts that every sensation is subjective, elaborated by the mind, so we have no means to apprehend reality, except by the direct action of God. The only substance to which I have direct access is myself. This theory is called psychological idealism.
• David Hume goes even further on the path towards the demise of philosophy: skepticism. For Hume, Berkeley's ideas are just copies of the sensations. Not even I exist as a substance: only my sensations exist. Hence it follows that Hume also denies causality. Perhaps Hume was the most nefarious philosopher in all of history. In the long run, the influence of his eighteen century theories was fatal for philosophy, as it led to the denial of reality and human reason, turning man into a mere bundle of sensations. From this, "frenetic intemperance" would follow as a consequence, not as the cause.
Manuel wrote: "This book is addressed to the United States of America (see chapter 18, for instance). However, the problems it signals are much too general, affect the whole of the Western civilization, are even ..."As stated in another thread, I would disagree with the premise of your argument in that 'frenetic intemperance' is the 'cause of everything' for this is not what the author alleges. Instead, he makes clear that it is but a sign of 'The Revolution' visible in our society. "...frenetic intemperance is the manifestation of this Revolution in economy" (emphasis mine)
The cause or Revolution, if you will, is broken down into four distinct phases or events in human history which affect the United States, Europe and other parts of the world. These being 1) the Renaissance/Protestant Revolt, 2) The French Revolution 3) The Communist Revolution and 4) what I have presented in another thread under a different name, the Cultural Revolution of the 1960s, cf. chapter 2.
Mod
The problem with Horvat's book is that he takes economy as the only factor to be considered, and in this sense (only in this sense) he adopts the Marxist position. Economy is not the only factor of society, it is just one, quite important, but just one.
Yes, I had noticed his division of modern Western history in four stages or phases, but I think this division is based on economics too. Tomorrow, if I have time, I'll offer a different division based on another factor in this thread.
I am half way through the book. I agree with the points he has made about the importance of the family, virtue and trust in Providence. But how to make it happen? So far he did not provide any specific measures.
Mod
1. Protestant Reformation.
2. French Revolution.
3. Communist Revolution.
4. Cultural Revolution.
- Division by Marquis de Condorcet (1743-1794)
10 phases. We are now in the tenth: the era of Science, Reason and Revolution.
- Division by Karl Marx:
1. Era of slavery (until the end of the Roman Empire).
2. Era of feudalism (until the Modern Western age).
3. Era of bourgeoisie (which took the power during the French Revolution).
4. Era of the proletariat (still to come in his time, although his supporters said that it had come with the Communist Revolution in Russia).
- Division by Auguste Comte (1798-1857):
1. Theological stage (until the first Greek philosophers).
2. Metaphysical stage (until the sixteenth century).
3. Scientific stage (our time).
- Oswald Spengler's position:
Every civilization is similar to a living being, with a life span of about 1500 years. Western civilization started around the year 500, so it should go into its death rattle around the year 2000.
- My position, as explained in my book Human Cultures & Evolution (1979):
Civilizations are similar to living species (or higher taxonomic groups), with a life span that depends on the civilization. However, Arnold J. Toynbee was probably right when he stated (in his A Study of History) that Western civilization was fatally wounded by the two world wars. That does not mean, however, that it may not live for a few more centuries.
My conclusions:
- Every thinker has his own division of history into phases. Every simple division should be mistrusted.
- Solutions based on a simple recipe are probably wrong.
My thoughts about Progress, in a little more detail:
The myth of progress in the evolution of Science
Mod
1. The problem nowadays is not economic. It is philosophical and ideologic. The main problem underlying our current woes is atheism.
2. Even so, I find it difficult to understand that a book which is supposedly attempting to understand the economic problems of our time does not make a single mention of scientific management or of Frederick Winslow Taylor, possibly the most important economist of the early 20th century.
3. Given that the author is specially interested in the current economic crisis, I find it surprising that Nikolai Kondratiev (the author of the theory of economic cycles) is not mentioned at all. He does mention several times Joseph Schumpeter, who was influenced by Kondratiev, but does not mention Schumpeter's tricyclic model, which I think should have something to say about this crisis.
4. Another "unmentioned" in the book, who had a lot to say about our situation, is the Russian-born American sociologist Pitirim Sorokin, in my opinion the greatest sociologist of the twentieth century. In his book "Social and cultural dynamics", Sorokin provides thousands of data to prove that Western civilization has passed through four clear phases, which alternate between ideational phases (such as the Middle Age Horvat so much admires) and sensate phases (such as ours, or the late Roman Empire). In sensate phases there is a decrease of religion and morals, with a corresponding increase in the search for pleasures.
5. There is no question that we are currently living in a sensate phase. Frenetic intemperance is just a symptom of this, not its cause. There is no question that we Catholic Christians should wish for the prompt arrival of the next ideational phase, and this is what Horvat is actually proposing. But can it be done? Can we change the current situation? I agree that we should try, but am afraid that the problem is much too hard (which does not mean that it shouldn't be attempted), that it will take not years, but centuries of fight, and in any case is not just economic, but ideologic.
In general, this book has told me little that I didn't know before reading it, and has not offered what I would consider reasonable practical measures against the current situation.
Mod
1. The problem nowadays is not economic. It is philosophical and ideologic. The main prob..."
I haven't finished yet, but I tend to agree with you. Two other readings that relate to this issue are Mancur Olson's The Rise and Decline of Nations, about the slow choking effect of combinatorial coalitions. Many modern industry and trade groups behave in ways similar to medieval guilds with bad results. And a recent article by Patrick Deneen in First Things - https://www.firstthings.com/article/2....
Deneen reflects on the Noble Lie that Plato requires for a just society to work, consisting of both a unifying myth and a myth justifying the inequality that in the Republic was inherited, as it is becoming more and more so in the U.S. today. In the West I think our myth, our Noble Truth, has been Christianity, which takes its unifying force from the Truth that we are all one in Christ Jesus and provides consolation for inequality in the idea that we all have different gifts, to be used for the benefit of the whole body. As the West has abandoned Christianity the only unifying ideas available seem to be nationalism and class warfare. These have had disastrous results in the past. At the conclusion of his article, Deneen notes that current identity politics a likely to lead us to a Hobbesian state of nature, a war of all against all.
As far as reasonable practical measures, the most distressing aspect of many Olson, Deneen, et al, is the fact that none of them seem to see a way out of our current "crisis" without first going through some kind of cataclysm first.
Mod
1. The problem nowadays is not economic. It is philosophical and ideologic. The main prob..."
I have finished and I agree with you and Mariangel. I would quibble with you that the problem is not just atheism, but materialism. This problem extends into the Church, runs rampant through the protestant churches and afflicts our societies. Most of our serious problems spring from this "ism" as people pursue sex, drugs or things to try to fill the God-shaped hole in their souls that can only be filled with God. As an indictment of our society, Horvat may have been better advised to talk about restlessness, rather than frenetic intemperance, tying the root cause of our societal ills to the spiritual malady succinctly and beautifully identified by Augustine.
One of the critical flaws I see with this book is it seems to say that we can live an ordered life, a human, family-scaled life, and still have all the wealth we have now, that our economy can grow just as fast without frenetic intemperance. I greatly doubt this. In my life, I have been trying to consider what it means to keep holy the Sabbath. It seems to me that it means one day a week is set aside for God, family and rest (in that order). Yet in my industry it is not uncommon for clients to demand in their pursuit of a deal that people work through the weekend, including Sunday. If I refuse, I can expect to lose work and suffer a reduction of income. Likewise, if people remain rooted in their communities, it means not moving to pursue greater opportunities. These reductions in individual income, writ large across an economy would mean a substantial reduction in wealth, though undoubtedly a substantial increase in well-being.
Mod
Yes, but materialism implies atheism.
The problem of frenetic intemperance is above all moral not economic. Temperance is one of the cardinal virtues not an economic concept. Temperance is the virtue whereby man governs his natural appetites and passions in accordance with the norms prescribed by reason and Faith. Temperance naturally gives rise to an organic economy since it teaches us to desire that which is proper for us and naturally leads to balance, proportion, and even a certain prosperity.
What is missing is balance today.
Mod
Temperance is the virtue whereby man governs his natural ap..."
As I said in previous comments, I think frenetic intemperance is a symptom, rather than the cause of the disease. Therefore fighting it would be similar to just fighting fever in a person who suffers an infection, without fighting the pathogens.
In my opinion, the real cause of our problems is atheism (or materialism, as John pointed out), and the solution cannot be mainly economic, as getting back to medieval style guilds would be.
Mod
Yes, but materialism implies atheism."
Fair enough.
Mod
Temperance is the virtue whereby man governs his natural ap..."
What is the difference between intemperance and frenetic intemperance?
The Catholic Book Club
Books mentioned in this topic
A Study of History, abridged (other topics)Human cultures and evolution (other topics)
Introduction to Christianity (other topics)
The Decline of the West (other topics)
As indicated in another topic, I disagree with the book's thesis that "frenetic intemperance" is the cause of everything. Therefore I am asking here what is the actual cause of the problem, which was pointed out first by Oswald Spengler in a book (The Decline of the West) whose first part was published in 1918, exactly one century ago.
I do have an idea of the possible answer, but will wait until others give their opinion before writing it here.