DOCSLIB.ORG

Is Wrong with Cafeteria Religion? on Freedom of Choice in Theology and Religious Studies Walter Lesch

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Is Wrong with Cafeteria Religion? on Freedom of Choice in Theology and Religious Studies Walter Lesch Louvain Studies 43 (2020): 164-180 doi: 10.2143/LS.43.2.3288166 © 2020 by Louvain Studies, all rights reserved What (if Anything) Is Wrong with Cafeteria Religion? On Freedom of Choice in Theology and Religious Studies Walter Lesch Abstract. — Religion is about responsible choices and selective appropriations of com- plex traditions. In this contribution, delivered as the 2020 Dies Facultatis lecture at the Faculty of Theology and Religious Studies, KU Leuven, the challenge of coping with plurality and individuality is explored with the help of the metaphor of a cafeteria where customers can pick and choose various items of food according to their personal prefer- ences. Classical theology is not comfortable with such a self-service mentality. Neverthe- less, theology and religious studies have to face the dynamics of individualization as the main feature of modernity. After briefly situating the metaphor of food in the context of religion, ‘cafeteria style’ will serve as a heuristic tool for the analysis of the pragmatics of dealing with diversity in the academic study of religious expressions. 1. Introduction to an Irritating Metaphor I invite you to think about what we are doing in theology and religious studies through the lens of cafeteria religion.1 What a strange topic for a lecture at the Feast of Saint Thomas at the Catholic University of Leuven! Instead of celebrating the beauty and the unity of an academic approach to theology, I suggest having a look at the contemporary situation of faith and religion in a context of pluralism and individualization.2 We have the 1. The text was delivered as a lecture on March 10, 2020 at the Dies facultatis of the Faculty of Theology and Religious Studies, KU Leuven. The oral and personal style of the presentation has been maintained in order to mirror the particular setting of the event. 2. Individualization is not an exclusive feature of modern and postmodern socie- ties. The results of a long-term research project at the Max Weber Centre for Advanced Cultural and Social Studies (University of Erfurt) can be found in Religious Individuali- sation: Historical Dimensions and Comparative Perspectives, two volumes, ed. Martin Fuchs, Antje Linkenbach, Martin Muslow, Bernd-Christian Otto, Rahul Bjørn Parson and Jörg Rüpke (Berlin and Boston, MA: De Gruyter, 2019). The book also makes available pre-modern and non-Western case studies. WHAT (IF ANYTHING) IS WRONG WITH CAFETERIA RELIGION? 165 privilege to live in a society where religious identities are no longer a mat- ter of destiny or of authoritarian constraint. We are free to choose what kind of religion we find convincing and attractive and can even pick and choose certain elements within religious traditions without opening the gates to hell and without having to fear being persecuted by the inquisi- tion. What seems to be good news for liberal Christians, is a nightmare for those who stand up against the negative impact of relativism. The defenders of orthodoxy coined the term ‘cafeteria religion’ in order to denounce what they considered to be an inappropriate way of doing jus- tice to religious practice and to religious doctrine. According to this tradi- tionalist view, religion has to be accepted as an integral proposal without any exceptions, even in cases of unbearable cognitive dissonance when ideas and actions are not consistent. Take it or leave it. In the worst case scenario, you are not even free to leave it and to go for a happier life without the depressing and soul-destroying ingredients of some religious narratives and institutional settings. Today most departments of theology and religious studies are run like intellectual cafeterias even if some of them hesitate to admit it openly. Very few students buy the whole package according to a maxi- malist version of study regulations. If they would do so, they would have to cope with their personal enemies in the broad spectrum of compul- sory subjects. For some of them, biblical languages are the ultimate hor- ror; others struggle with the surrealism of some debates in dogmatic theology; still others do not understand why they have to deal with the challenges of social ethics. Sooner or later, they can find their happiness in their field of specialization and get rid of all the embarrassing things they were obliged to learn. There is nothing wrong with such a progres- sive selection of the most interesting and intellectually convincing items by each student and scholar. What we do in research-based theology is cafeteria religion at its best. We get the licence to pick and choose our preferred subjects and to forget about most of the rest. That’s what suc- cessful researchers look like when they cannot afford to remain general- ist scholars all their lives following the ideal of a cultivated Renaissance intellectual. However, with their high level of specialization they might have to pay a price. Let me put it in a provocative way: these researchers are sometimes bad teachers and they show little interest in their col- leagues’ work. Having spent some decades in the field of theology and religious studies, I am really scared by the lack of interaction and curios- ity to have a look at the broader picture. If everybody remains in his or her corner of outstanding expert knowledge, there will be no time for common projects and for passionate discussions. Theologians who like 166 WALTER LESCH the rhetoric of combatting relativism are very often trapped by the splen- did isolation of their research and thus contribute involuntarily to the relativization of the differentiated areas. In this lecture, I intend to reflect upon the contemporary crisis of religion by looking at the habitus of the academic experts of religion. In how far are they accountable for their choices? And in how far does religious plurality find an adequate expression in the plural voices of theological research?3 Sociologically speaking, the case of academic work is only a tiny part of the reality in which religion can appear. But it is a significant phenomenon. I invite you to consider the choices we make in our work with the help of the metaphor of a cafeteria as a reference point for the organization of our meeting places. The use of such a comparison can of course be misleading. To be clear: I am not looking for a new comprehensive doctrine. The playful use of the cafeteria case is nothing else but a thought experiment about ways of coping with plurality, common ground and interdisciplinary exchange. My argumentation will have six parts. I start by reminding us of the negative connotations of the catchword ‘cafeteria religion’ and then move on to the more general level of the metaphor of food in religion. The following three sections will be dedicated to a reconstruction of typical views on plurality in theology and sociology, with the help of Peter L. Berger and Hans Joas. The concluding remarks will be about some modest proposals concerning new configurations in the field of theologies and religious studies. 2. The Negative Perception of Cafeteria Religion Before we go to the critique of cafeteria religion, we have to understand what a cafeteria represents as a rather modern type of food service, usu- ally in big companies and institutions. The origins are in the late 19th century in the USA. There is no table service in cafeterias. People 3. When I use the term ‘theology’, it is meant to be systematically in touch with the area of ‘religious studies’. A faculty with the name ‘Theology and Religious Studies’ is the most appropriate address for the study of all questions related to religion. Without denying the specific approach of what is called ‘theology’, this must be embedded in the framework of an academically respectable epistemology. Cf. the still relevant document published by the German Council of Science and Humanities (Wissenschaftsrat), Recom- mendations on the Advancement of Theologies and Sciences concerned with Religions at German Universities (Berlin: Wissenschaftsrat, 2010). Online: https://www.wissen- schaftsrat.de/download/archiv/9678-10_engl.pdf;jsessionid=511AE91D596EA5B802F6 33522462FF48.delivery2-master?__blob=publicationFile&v=2 (accessed April 4, 2020). WHAT (IF ANYTHING) IS WRONG WITH CAFETERIA RELIGION? 167 go to food counters where they can choose from among different items, drinks or prepared dishes. In some cases, hot meals can be purchased. At the end of the line, customers pay for the things they have on their tray and check out before choosing a place at a table in the dining room. The invention of this not very aristocratic way of serving food is closely linked to the necessity of having an acceptable quality of products at places where a certain number of people go to eat: in schools, universi- ties, hospitals, museums, even places of worship as in the popular cafete- rias of prestigious buildings belonging to the Church of England. The award-winning Café in the Crypt at Saint Martin in the Fields in Lon- don is one of the most famous examples.4 The typical characteristics are self-service and free choice at the food counters. All this makes it of course very different from table service and elaborated menus in high quality restaurants. The term ‘cafeteria Christianity’ started to circulate in the 1980s when highly motivated Christians accused other Christians of no longer accepting the totality of the doctrine and just selecting the elements they found suitable for their personal view on God and the world. Cafeteria Christianity became a clearly pejorative term pointing to the lack of loyalty of those who still consider themselves as members of their reli- gious community without subscribing to all the moral rules and to all the articles of faith.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Hedgehog and the Fox” Reconsidered 149
    The “Hedgehog and the Fox” Reconsidered 149 Chapter 9 The “Hedgehog and the Fox” Reconsidered: Unreconciled Religious Diversity in the Dialogue of Civilizations1 Philip L. Wickeri The theme for religions and the dialogue of civilizations, is a most important one for creating peace and harmony in our world and in our own communities. In this paper, I re-introduce the metaphor of “the hedgehog and the fox” as a way of speaking about inter-civilizational dialogue in a world of unreconciled religious diversity. By unreconciled diversity, I mean the inter-religious differ- ences that cannot be overcome or “harmonized” and therefore must be accepted and dealt with. 1 Part In 1953, Sir Isaiah Berlin (1909–1997) wrote an essay on Leo Tolstoy’s view of history entitled “The Hedgehog and the Fox.”2 This became one of the most influential essays ever written on Western intellectual history, and it is still in print today. Berlin takes his point of departure from an obscure philosophical fragment that has been attributed to the ancient Greek poet Archilochus: The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing. There is no certain interpretation of this sentence. The fragment may mean no more than that the fox, in his cunning, is defeated by the hedgehog’s one sure defense. But Berlin reinterprets the fragment to elaborate a basic intellectual 1 China Social Science Forum (2013: Religious Studies) 中国社会科学论坛 (2013: 宗教学). Religions and the Dialogue of Civilizations [宗教与文明对话 Zongjiao yu wenming duihua], 2nd-5th November 2013. 2 Isaiah Berlin, “The Hedgehog and the Fox,” Russian Thinkers, ed.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Introduction
    A fox knows many things but a hedgehog one big thing Mark Aronoff Stony Brook University 1. Introduction Isaiah Berlin’s little book, The Hedgehog and the Fox (1953), takes its title from a line by the Greek poet Archilochus: πόλλ᾽ οἶδ᾽ ἀλωπηξ ἀλλ᾽ ἐχῖνος ἓν μέγα ‘many [things] knows [a] fox but [a] hedgehog one big [thing]’. Since it is impossible to do justice in a paraphrase to Berlin’s prose, I will quote the relevant passage in full: [T]aken figuratively, the words can be made to yield a sense in which they mark one of the deepest differences which divide writers and thinkers, and, it may be, human beings in general. For there exists a great chasm between those, on one side, who relate everything to a single central vision, one system less or more coherent or articulate, in terms of which they understand, think, and feel—a single, universal, organizing principle in terms of which alone all that they are and say has significance—and, on the other side, those who pursue many ends, often unrelated and even contradictory, connected, if at all, only in some de facto way, for some psychological or physiological cause, related by no moral or aesthetic principle; these last lead lives, perform acts, and entertain ideas that are centrifugal rather than centripetal, their thought is scattered or diffused, moving on many levels, seizing upon the essence of a vast variety of experiences and objects for what they are in themselves, without, consciously or unconsciously, seeking to fit them into, or exclude them from, any one unchanging, all-embracing, sometimes self-contradictory and incomplete, at times fanatical, unitary vision.
    [Show full text]
  • The Hedgehog and the Fox: an Essay on Tolstoys View of History Pdf, Epub, Ebook
    THE HEDGEHOG AND THE FOX: AN ESSAY ON TOLSTOYS VIEW OF HISTORY PDF, EPUB, EBOOK Isaiah Berlin,Henry Hardy,Michael Ignatieff | 144 pages | 02 Jun 2013 | Princeton University Press | 9780691156002 | English | New Jersey, United States The Hedgehog and the Fox: An Essay on Tolstoys View of History PDF Book On the other hand, foxes don't believe that the world has any particular goal. In War and Peace , which concludes with a long essay on history, he was both. Book Description Paperback. He declared that no one in the actual heat of battle can begin to tell what is going on. He excelled as an essayist, lecturer and conversationalist; and as a brilliant speaker who delivered, rapidly and spontaneously, richly allusive and coherently structured material, whether for a lecture series at Oxford University or as a broadcaster on the BBC Thir Sir Isaiah Berlin was a philosopher and historian of ideas, regarded as one of the leading liberal thinkers of the twentieth century. It really does. He believed that free will was an illusion and that the idea that great events happen because of "great men", that we can say that one thing happens because one commander made this decision, is ludicrous. In his Founding Brothers about key figures of the American Revolution, the historian Joseph Ellis , uses Berlin's "Hedgehog and Fox" concept in evaluating George Washington , noting that "Washington was an archetypal hedgehog. Related Articles. Eventually, though, Berlin reveals that Tolstoy had an even stronger belief: that no actor inside of history can ever understand why things happen the way they do, no matter the depth of his study.
    [Show full text]
  • Pluralism, Liberalism, and Distributive Justice
    CROWDER FINAL ARTICLE 12/28/2009 10:46 AM Pluralism, Liberalism, and Distributive Justice GEORGE CROWDER* TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 773 II. LIBERAL PLURALISM .......................................................................................... 776 III. DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE: LAISSEZ-FAIRE .............................................................. 782 IV. EGALITARIAN LIBERALISM ................................................................................. 788 V. WELFARE OR RESOURCES? ................................................................................. 791 VI. RESOURCES OR CAPABILITIES? ........................................................................... 794 VII. CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................... 800 I. INTRODUCTION Isaiah Berlin famously preferred the fox to the hedgehog. The hedgehog, who “knows one big thing,” is essentially the monist, seeking to reduce moral complexity to a single formula that will answer all ethical and political questions.1 For Berlin, this approach to the moral world is both false and dangerous: false because human conduct and values are too complex to be captured in this way; dangerous because the attempt to do so carries the risk of forcing people into categories that ignore or distort their real wishes and needs. We are better off, at least when it comes to politics, with the fox. The pluralist fox,
    [Show full text]
  • Book Reviews
    96 Int. J. Human Rights and Constitutional Studies, Vol. 1, No. 1, 2013 Book Reviews Reviewed by Ch.M. Akrivopoulou E-mail: [email protected] 1 Justice for Hedgehogs by: Ronald Dworkin Published 2011 by Harvard University Press 79 Garden Street, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA, 506pp ISBN: 978-0-674-04671-9 1.1 The hedgehog and the fox in Dworkin With a metaphor inspired by the famous verse of the Greek ancient poet Archilochus, «Πολλ’ οίδ’ αλώπηξ, εχίνος δε εν, μέγα»"(=The fox knows many things and the hedgehog one big), which was the title of one of the most famous essays of the liberal philosopher Isaiah Berlin (The Hedgehog and the Fox: An Essay on Tolstoy’s View of History, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, London 1953), Ronald Dworkin attempts to summarise in this recent book his central theory on value and its unity. Namely, the author attempts to condense the basic principles of moral theory in a general grand theory for truth, life, morality, ethics, democracy, interpretation, art, history, politics and justice. This theory reflects all of the author’s previous theoretical work as well as his position regarding the modern challenges endangering the moral values of the globalised societies as illustrated by the triumph of technology over the ethics of life, humanity and dignity. The entire text is written with a vivid, delightful and enchanting for the reader, manner. The author defends his arguments while ‘playing’ with the metaphor of the fox and the hedgehog and adopting the role of the second. His book incorporates comments and reviews referring to his entire work in an open minded, simply written text which allows the reader to enjoy the closest possible approach to Dworkin’s thought.
    [Show full text]
  • The Hedgehog and the Fox
    The Hedgehog and the Fox In a classic,“The Proper Study of Mankind”, Isaiah Berlin wrote an essay: “The Hedgehog and the Fox”. It underscores the need to be a multi-disciplinary thinker. Archilochus Plato www.capitalideasonline.com Page - 1 The Hedgehog and the Fox Lucretius Nietzsche Herodotus www.capitalideasonline.com Page - 2 The Hedgehog and the Fox “There is a line among the fragments of the Greek poet Archilochus which says: ‘The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing’. Scholars have differed about the correct interpretation of these dark words, which may mean no more than that the fox, for all his cunning, is defeated by the hedgehog’s one defence. But, taken figuratively, the words can be made to yield a sense in which they mark one of the deepest differences which divide writers and thinkers, and, it may be, human beings in general. For there exists a great chasm between those, on one side, who relate everything to a single central vision, one system, less or more coherent or articulate, in terms of which they understand, think and feel – a single, universal, organising principle in terms of which alone all that they are and say has significance – and, on the other side, those who pursue many ends, often unrelated and even contradictory, connected, if at all, only in some de facto way, for some psychological or physiological cause, related to no moral or aesthetic principle. These last lead lives, perform acts and entertain ideas that are centrifugal rather than centripetal; their thought is scattered or diffused, moving on many levels, seizing upon the essence of a vast variety of experiences and objects for what they are in themselves, without, consciously or unconsciously, seeking to fit them into, or exclude them from, anyone unchanging, all- embracing, sometimes self-contradictory and incomplete, at times fanatical, unitary inner vision.
    [Show full text]
  • Ronald Dworkin
    VOLUME 127 DECEMBER 2013 NUMBER 2 © 2013 by The Harvard Law Review Association IN MEMORIAM: RONALD DWORKIN The editors of the Harvard Law Review respectfully dedicate this issue to Professor Ronald Dworkin. Richard H. Fallon, Jr.∗ My first exposure to Ronald Dworkin came at Oxford, in the fall of 1975. Although I was there to study Philosophy, Politics, and Eco- nomics, not Law, friends told me that Professor Dworkin’s packed lec- tures on jurisprudence were not to be missed. They were right. Dworkin delivered the most commanding lectures that I had ever heard, at Oxford or anywhere else. Plainly relishing the engagement of his rapt audience, and speaking entirely without notes, he worked his way through, and demolished, various thinkers’ accounts of what made it the case, if it was the case, that “The law is that P.” The cri- tiques built inexorably to the conclusion that first made Dworkin fa- mous: decision of hard cases requires a process of interpretation in which principles, not just “pedigreed” rules, help to make it the case, if it is the case, that “The law is that P.” In one way, Dworkin was the very model of an Oxford philosopher. Though dense, his arguments were clear. He was a master of distinc- tions. But in another way, Dworkin was a gust of fresh air blowing through the ancient university during my two years there. To make his points, he used vivid, often funny examples. After skewering one position or another, he would pause to invite questions and challenges. Challenges came frequently because Dworkin’s largest target was his eminent predecessor as Oxford’s Professor of Jurisprudence, H.
    [Show full text]
  • The Hedgehog and the Fox
    The Hedgehog and the Fox A queer combination of the brain of an English chemist with the soul of an Indian Buddhist. E. M. de Vogüé 1 I There is a line among the fragments of the Greek poet Archilo chus which says: ‘The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing.’2 Scholars have differed about the correct interpretation of these dark words, which may mean no more than that the fox, for all his cunning, is defeated by the 1 ‘On dirait l’esprit d’un chimiste anglais dans l’âme d’un bouddhiste hindou; se charge qui pourra d’expliquer cet étrange accouplment’: Le Roman russe (Paris, 1886), 282. 2 ‘po*ll’ o i# d ’ a$lw* phx, a$ ll’ e$ci&nov e=n me*ga.’ Archilochus fragment 201 in M. L. West (ed.), Iambi et elegi graeci ante Alexandrum cantati, 2nd ed., vol. 1 (Oxford, 1989). [The fragment was preserved in a collection of proverbs by the Greek Sophist Zenobius (5. 68), who says that it is found in both Archilochus and Homer – West, op. cit., vol. 2 (Oxford, 1992), ‘Homerus’ fragment 5. Since it is iambic rather than dactylic in metre, the attribu- tion to Homer is likely to mean that it appeared in the (now thought pseudo-Homeric) comic epic poem Margites, probably written later than Archilochus’ poem. See e.g. C. M. Bowra, ‘The Fox and the Hedgehog’, Classical Quarterly 34 (1940), 26–9 (see 26), an article reprinted with revisions in Bowra’s On Greek Margins (Oxford, 1970), 59–66 (see 59), and evidently unknown to Berlin.
    [Show full text]
  • Making Sense of a Most Popular Metaphor in Management: Towards a Hedgefox Scale for Cognitive Styles
    Article Making Sense of a Most Popular Metaphor in Management: Towards a HedgeFox Scale for Cognitive Styles Timo Meynhardt 1,2,*, Carolin Hermann 2 and Stefan Anderer 1,3 1 HHL Leipzig Graduate School of Management, Jahnallee 59, 04109 Leipzig, Germany 2 Center for Leadership and Values in Society, University of St. Gallen, Dufourstrasse 40a, 9000 St. Gallen, Switzerland; [email protected] 3 Center for Advanced Studies in Management, HHL Leipzig Graduate School of Management, Jahnallee 59, 04109 Leipzig,Germany; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 27 June 2017; Accepted: 3 September 2017; Published: 11 September 2017 Abstract: Research on cognitive style has gathered momentum over the past 40 years, especially with respect to learning, problem-solving, and decision-making. This investigation adapts Tetlock’s hedgehog–fox scale for German-speaking respondents through three large-scale studies (n = 17,072) and examines the influence of cognitive style on employees’ public value assessments of their employing organizations. Our data led us to propose a revised and more economical HedgeFox Scale. In contrast with Tetlock’s findings, our results provide empirical and theoretical arguments for a two-factor structure. This shift in dimensionality affects the nature of the construct and aligns hedgehog–fox research with the latest developments in cognitive style research. Our results contribute to the ongoing interest in the dimensionality of cognitive styles and support the call for a more diverse picture. Finally, we provide recommendations for individuals and organizations. Keywords: decision making; cognition; cognitive style; dimensionality; hedgehog–fox metaphor; public value 1. Introduction From Tetlock’s (2005) long-term study of political experts’ abilities to forecast future events, we know that cognitive style is associated with decision-making processes.
    [Show full text]
  • Dick Maggiore: Lots to Learn from the Hedgehog and the Fox
    Dick Maggiore: Lots to learn from the hedgehog and the fox By Dick Maggiore Special to The Canton Repository Posted at 8:20 AM To understand the spiny hedgehog and the sly silver fox, we must go back nearly three millennia. It started with a verse from the 7th century BC Greek poet Archilochus: “The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows only one big thing.” Plato had similar views in 400 BC. War and Peace by Russian-born Leo Tolstoy, one of the greatest authors of all time, blurs the line between fiction and history to get closer to the truth. He recognized we are reconciled to life as it is, foxlike, seeing multiple things in the world, while at the same time, searching for a single hedgehog- like truth. In 1953, Isaiah Berlin’s The Hedgehog and the Fox was published as an essay on Tolstoy’s view of history. Berlin, one of the finest minds of his time, explores in his essay the basic difference between those who are fascinated by the infinite variety of things, foxes, versus those who relate everything through the lens of a single-focused idea, hedgehogs. More recently, in his 2001 book Good to Great, Jim Collins re-popularized the concept of the hedgehog and the fox. The book was written to help figure out why some companies become great - while others don't. Funny how powerful ideas tend to stick around. Collins says the hedgehog deeply understands one idea and does it really well over a long period of time.
    [Show full text]
  • The Tension Between Art and Science in Historical Writing
    East Tennessee State University Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University Electronic Theses and Dissertations Student Works 8-2005 The eT nsion between Art and Science in Historical Writing. Michael Lee Depew East Tennessee State University Follow this and additional works at: https://dc.etsu.edu/etd Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Depew, Michael Lee, "The eT nsion between Art and Science in Historical Writing." (2005). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 1057. https://dc.etsu.edu/etd/1057 This Thesis - Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Works at Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Tension between Art and Science in Historical Writing A thesis presented to the faculty of the Department of History East Tennessee State University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts in History by Michael Lee Depew August 2005 William Douglas Burgess, Chair Melvin Page Ronnie Day Keywords: Historical Theory, Historiography, Philosophy of History, Pre-Socratics, iJstoriva, Aristotle, Herodotus, Homer ABSTRACT The Tension between Art and Science in Historical Writing by Michael Lee Depew A perennial question in the philosophy of history is whether history is a science or an art. This thesis contests that this question constitutes a false dichotomy, limiting the discussion in such a way as to exclude other possibilities of understanding the nature of the historical task. The speculative philosophies of Augustine, Kant, and Marx; the critical philosophies of Ranke, Comte along with the later positivist, and the historical idealist such as Collingwood will be surveyed.
    [Show full text]
  • The Hedgehog and the Fox – Two Styles of Science
    The hedgehog and the fox – two styles of science Sunny Y. Auyang “The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing," the Greek poet Archilochus once said. Perhaps Archilochus simply meant that the hedgehog’s single defense defeats the fox’s many tricks. Yet, the hedgehog and the fox were turned into metaphors two types of thinkers and writers by the historian philosopher Isaiah Berlin. All the thinking and action of the hedgehog revolve around a single vision and are structure by a single set of principles that the hedgehog holds to be universal. Foxes lack such central vision and universal principles; they seize many experiences and pursuit many ends, always holding concrete particulars to be paramount. Each way of thinking has its strength and weakness; neither is superior to the other. Berlin cited Plato, Dante, and Dostoevsky as hedgehogs; Aristotle, Shakespeare, and Pushkin foxes. Tolstoy was diagnosed as a fox who imagined himself a hedgehog. The metaphor of the hedgehog and the fox can also be applied to two styles of science. Generally, the theoretical sciences with their penchant for generalization are hedgehogs; the historical sciences with their emphasis on particulars are foxes. Within theoretical science, elementary particle physics is the prime hedgehog, whose whole effort gravitates toward the fundamental building blocks of the universe. Chemistry, biology, condensed matter physics, and economics are foxes. Evolutionary biology, I think, is somewhat like Tolstoy. Sciences that try to wrestle with complex phenomena, especially those high organizational levels, tend to be foxes. Foxes lack a central vortex, but that does not imply their thoughts are incoherent, inconsistent, or entirely fragmentary.
    [Show full text]