Reckless Rationalism and Heroic Reverence in Homer's Odyssey Author(s): Darrell Dobbs Source: The American Political Science Review, Vol. 81, No. 2 (Jun., 1987), pp. 491-508 Published by: American Political Science Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1961963 Accessed: 10/12/2010 23:52 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=apsa. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. American Political Science Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The American Political Science Review. http://www.jstor.org RECKLESS RATIONALISMAND HEROICREVERENCE IN HOMER'S ODYSSEY DARRELL DOBBS Universityof Houston A decision-theoretic analysis of the central incident of Homer'sOdyssey revealsthe insufficiencyof rationalcalculation as a guide for political prudence.Surprisingly, the poet distinguishesbetween two rationaland formally iden- tical calculations in no uncertain terms; he condemns one as utter recklessnessand praises the other as consummatewisdom. I maintainthat this discrepancyis neitheran artifact of sloppy editorial patchwork nor the result of a "homericnod" but instead points towarda politicallysignificant distinction as yet obscuredby a merelyrationalis- tic perspective. The recklessnessof Odysseus' crewmen, who deliberatelyslaughter sacred cattle to forestall starvation, consists in their rationalistictransgression of the limits of reason. These limits are most evident in the defianceof commensurabilitythat characterizesthe sacred. The wisdom of Odysseus, by contrast, is manifestin his learn- ing to temperreason with respectfor.the sacred. By virtue of reverence,Odysseus wins his struggle to preservehis psyche, home and regime. Former's epic as having "no bearing on [democratic] poems have attracted little attention social and political needs," but tending among modem students of politics for rather to lead its enthusiaststo "perturb many reasons, not the least of which is the the state in the name of the Greeksand the argument that these works are adverse or, Romans, instead of enrichingit with their at best, irrelevant to contemporary liberal productiveindustry." Thus the greatcom- democracy. To be sure, Homer's polities mentator on the American polity would are tribal, localized, and monarchical, question the vitality of any democratic while our own is pluralistic, continental, regimebent on nursinga race of would-be and democratic. Moreover, certain quali- Achilleis. In response to this legitimate ties of character celebrated in the poems, and public-spiritedconcern, I intend to which consequently stimulate emulation expound a central, though neglected, in the reader, may be of dubious value as lesson of Homer's Odyssey that is both equipment for democratic citizenship. relevant and beneficial to liberal democ- One thinks instantly of the magnificent racy. I hope to do so, moreover,in a man- thirst for glory that virtually epitomizes ner that Tocqueville, one of the great the Homeric hero but which in modem critics of rationalism in politics, would times has come to be regarded as nothing himself find persuasive. less than political dynamite. Tocqueville As I see it, the contribution of the (1945, 2:63), for example, warns against Odyssey to liberal democracy consists the study of such "aristocratic" literature, principally in its critique of rationalism. AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW VOL. 81 NO. 2 JUNE 1987 American Political Science Review Vol. 81 By rationalismI mean the presumptionof never give a sufficient reason for a par- the ultimate hegemony of reason in the ticularrule because any calculationof its constitution of wisdom.' Hayek (1960, consequences must make assumptions chap. 4), Oakeshott (1962, 1-36), and concerningthe contextualpractices that in Gilder (1981, pt. 3) have made significant part determineits utility. The same point contributionstoward identifyingthe pre- applies to Pascal's wager: apart from a cise character of the threat posed by priorfaith in a divine providencethat has rationalism to liberal democracy. But preparedHeaven as a place of rewardfor their common root lies in Tocqueville's the righteousand Hell as a place of pun- (1945, 1:12) trenchant observation that ishment for the unrighteous(and not the "[political]liberty cannot be established' reverse),the wager-and moral propriety without morality, nor morality without -is by no means compellinglyrational. It faith." Despite such warnings, contem- appears that there is something to porary rationalists remain undaunted. Tocqueville'scontention after all. Much of the Law and Economicsmove- This result will not surprisestudents of ment, for example, is directed toward politicalphilosophy. In lecturespublished establishinglegal principleson groundsof posthumously, Leo Strauss (1979, 1981) efficiency, as if economic calculationsof cogently argues that "philosophy has social wealth had more authority than never refuted revelation." He identifies "self-evident"inalienable rights (Posner the conflict between Greek philosophy 1977; Rubin 1977; cf. Aranson 1984). The and biblicalrevelation as "thesecret of the philosophicalunderpinning of this ration- vitality of Western civilization" and alistic counteroffensive is most power- recommends that philosophers remain fully expressed by Rawls (1955). Rawls "open to the challenge of theology." If attempts simultaneously to vindicate Straussis correct, there is no warrantfor morality and to establish the ultimate assuming the comprehensivesovereignty authorityof reasonby subsumingthe par- of reason. One wonders, however, how ticular instance (or "act")of moral pro- the Greek philosophers, whom Strauss priety, in which utilitarianconsiderations holds in the highest regard, might have are agreed not to be decisive, under a lived up to his standard,lacking as they generalpractice ("rule") which, he claims, did access to the biblical revelation. In enjoys a utilitarian authorization. The Homer'scritique of rationalism,I believe, pious acts of a believer whose faith is we shall find a nonbiblicalinfluence that securedby Pascal'swager would, I think, may help account for the recognition perfectly exemplify Rawls's argument. If among subsequentGreek philosophers of pious acts are tenableon this rationalistic the limits of reason. basis, it would follow that the last link in In the Odyssey Homer intends2to ele- Tocqueville's contention is false. But vate Odysseus to a rank at least equal to Hayek's (1976, 17-23) critique of rule that of the illustriousAchilles, the hero of utilitarianismmay be understoodas call- the Iliad. He presents the case for ing Pascal's bluff. Hayek notes that the Odysseus' superiority by recounting the consequences of observing a particular harrowing, though ultimately successful, rule will vary as the constellationof other return of Odysseus to home and throne practicesobserved in society varies-even after the Trojan War. Odysseus' adven- at the margin. But the utilitarianwarrant tures, the obstacleshe confrontsand over- for one such constellation of contextual comes in winning his return,summon the practicesover anotheris by no means evi- special excellences that define him as a dent. Owing to the sheer complexity of hero. The most celebratedof these excel- society, Hayek argues, utilitarians can lences is, of course, Odysseus'remarkable 492 1987 Homer's Odyssey intelligence.But the most criticalof these must do more than simply catalogue the excellences,I shall argue, is reverence.By furtherexploits of the wily Odysseus. A reverenceI mean the correctperception of fresh study of this work will, I believe, and respect for the sacred, which by its revealthat Homerdoes not rest Odysseus' nature defies rational commensuration. heroic credentialsupon a twice-told tale As we shall see, it is by virtue of reverence of brains versus brawn. In the Odyssey, that Odysseus resists certain temptations he takes a differenttack. Homer chroni- to rationalisticexcess that would other- cles the development in Odysseus of wise arresthis heroic return. reverence, which moderates and thus The commentators have not, in my guides his remarkableintellectual prow- view, paid sufficient attention to the ess. Thus, in contrast to the view cur- important strain of antirationalismim- rently prevalentamong homericscholars, plicit in the poet's celebration of I hope to show that it is not chiefly the Odysseus'heroic reverence.On the con- resourcefulnessof Odysseus' intellect but trary, they regardOdysseus' greatness as ratherhis recognitionof its limits that