Reviews for Between Past and Future

The average rating for Between Past and Future based on 2 reviews is 5 stars.

Review # 1 was written on 2016-02-14 00:00:00 Craig Cassidy [Preface:] Arendt introduces her rationale for the title using a parable from Kafka, a brilliant thought-problem in which "he" has two antagonists; one, the origin, pushes from behind and the other blocks the road ahead. [1. Tradition and the Modern Age:] Arendt reviews in triptych form three 19th Century Writers who have sealed off the philosophical traditions started by Plato and his Allegory of the Cave: Kierkegaard, Marx, and Nietszche. She profiles the contributions each made--each quite independent of the others--in establishing new traditions of doubt, alienation, and utopia/dystopia. [2: The Concept of History: Ancient and Modern:] Is History linear or cyclical? Whose facts will get selected for the narrative? Classic Arendt essay (written while she was writing The Human Condition, so the resemblance exists) in which she guides through ancient and modern histories only to have the final two pages rise up and slay. From Herodotus and Thucydides, Arendt culls out the focus of the eternal return in the Greek world where immortality in great deeds was the focus of the histories; St. Augustine shifted the focus to linear, direct path, emphasizing historical narratives that helped the faithful find the narrow path. But when Arendt arrives at the Moderns, starting with Hobbes and Kant and Hegel, then Marx, she has plenty to write about, mostly eviscerating Marx. Ultimately, she lands the reader back where she began, noting that historians can find any pattern in the details and they will still be right. But since humans act without ever knowing what will be the consequences of their acts, reading History to find predictions, even a sense of what to expect is fruitless. Better to read it for what it is and judge in the now, in the moment between past and future. [3: What Is Authority?] Arendt's first step is to re-title this essay to 'What Was Authority?' since the three pillars of authority (religion, tradition, and authority) have deteriorated away to dust on a broken column. Most of the space in this essay she devotes to exploring how Plato and the Romans developed authority (not tyranny, not totalitarianism). My biggest revelation came near the end in which she explains that the Christian Church's doctrine of the afterlife has been adapted from the last book of Plato's Republic; in that chapter, Plato uses the Er-Myth as a means to control those citizens to act with goodness who were not persuaded from his teachings. Fascinating. [4: What Is Freedom?] More distortion than clarification, the philosophers have given us, Arendt claims. Since the Greeks and the Romans had limited views of freedom (freedom as it allows for one to contribute to the polis or to the city), the Christians were the first to stress individual freedom. But Arendt stresses mostly in her essay how the will acts in free action; that is, how freedom is meaningless unless acted upon. To sum, we are only as free as our last actions. [5: Crisis in Education:] Beginning with the premise that if one wishes to influence change in current culture, one must begin with education, Arendt outlines the importance of shunning assorted packages for reform and political charges using the students as shills for genuine learning. In some respects, this essay is conservative but, only in the sense of Postman's book, Teaching as a Conserving Activity. Ultimately, she is radical (neither liberal or conservative) in calling for education that is constantly renewing itself because natural depletion--old ideas die out and new ideas come along--so relax and get used to change. [6: The Crisis in Culture:] Its Social and Political Significance} I appreciate how Arendt delineates between art and kitsch: "Mass society...wants not culture but entertainment, and the wares offered by the entertainment industry are indeed consumed by society just like any other consumer goods." She continues that the entertainment industry has its own metabolism, one that feeds on its subjects by devouring them. That's a harsh criticism for most of what pop culture offers but it is worth noting. Arendt argues that the permanence of humanities lies it their ability to reflect beauty. It causes me to ask myself? Am I reading this book [whatever book at hand] in order to or for the sake of. If it is the former, Arendt saves a seat for me in the philistine section; if it is the latter, she may let me contemplate Beauty with her in the Humanities section. [7: Truth and Politics:] Written in the same year that Arendt published Eichmann in Jerusalem, this essay shows me that she took the high road in all the criticism she received. In the final pages, she references how Homer exalted the Greeks and the Trojans, Achilles and Hector, and thereby raised the standard for epic literature in portraying both sides of the contest; in reporting and in public truth-telling (politics?), this is the first examples of how to show courage, regardless of the contestant. She writes that deceit can tear a hole in the fabric of factuality; that to the code needs to be to tell the truth though the whole world may perish ("Fiat veritas, et pereat mundus"); that lies, like reasoning for the individual, gathers momentum when heard in the herd (see Federalist Papers, #49); and "factual truth informs political thought just as rational truth informs philosophical speculation." First rule is never to lie to yourself. The rest is history. [8: The Conquest of Space and the Stature of Man:] I found consistent themes in this essay that appeared in the final section ("The Vita Activa and the Modern Age") in The Human Condition, mainly her reference to Kafka's quote--"Man found the Archimedean point but he used it against himself; it seems that he was permitted to find it only under this condition"). Even though the publication date on this essay is from the 60s, it remains relevant today since we still reach into space, into the genome and into robotic fabrications. All of these scientific explorations are changing us, Arendt notes. To be cognizant of this process and know that the lever may shift the earth such that our world may implode or explode, that we may get lost in the immensity of the universe in the name of human curiosity requires that avoid living with fantasy of some utopia or that we avoid the past abuses in our history but that we live in the middle, between past and future.

Review # 2 was written on 2019-07-22 00:00:00 Jared Nagel I read only the author's preface and the first and third essays. Taken alone, they merit five stars. Arendt is a fascinating thinker and, based on the essays that I did read, I recommend this volume highly. I don't know when I will return to finish this book. It might be soon. Perhaps, I will fit the unread essays in between other books. In any event, I look forward to reading more of Arendt. She is a wonderful writer who has a bit of an affinity for looking at things in a way that reminds me of Leo Strauss. But her prose puts Strauss' to shame.