Lewis S. Feuer – författare

Lewis Feuer, a distinguished philosopher and social critic, has presented a remarkable thesis in "Imperialism and the Anti-Imperialist Mind". Feuer regards imperialism as a natural political process, and one that is endemic to all nations under all political and social systems. The significant distinction to make is whether a given imperialistic period is progressive or regressive. The greatest historical advances, maintains Feuer, have been made during progressive imperialistic eras, such as the Hellenic-Macedonian, the Roman, and the modern British periods. Retrogression took place under the Tartar and Spanish imperialisms. Feuer claims that neo-Marxists are wrong when they cite the relative backwardness of colonial peoples and blame the condition on the imperialism of advanced Western nations. History tells a different tale.As John Stuart Mill demonstrated in the case of India, the actual historical record shows the British imperialistic era to be one of remarkable development, and one that prompted democracy. In a sure-to-be controversial passage, Feuer asserts that the results of imperialistic interventions differ as to result in predictable ways.Therefore, the relative "participatory imperialism" practised by the United States and Britain has achieved positive results, while the authoritarian imperialism of the Soviet Union has resulted in retrogression. He cites the Belgian Congo as a prime example of authoritarian imperialism.

In this classic work the author undertakes to show how Spinoza's philosophical ideas, particularly his political ideas, were influenced by his underlying emotional responses to the conflicts of his time. It thus differs form most professional philosophical analyses of the philosophy of Spinoza. The author identifies and discusses three periods in the development of Spinoza's thought and shows how they were reactions to the religious, political and economic developments in the Netherlands at the time. In his first period, Spinoza reacted very strongly to the competitive capitalism of the Amsterdam Jews whose values were "so thoroughly pervaded by an economic ethics that decrees the stock exchange approached in dignity the decrees of God," and of the ruling classes of Amsterdam, and was led out only to give up his business activities but also to throw in his lot with the Utopian groups of the day. In his second period, Spinoza developed serious doubts about the practicality of such idealistic movements and became a "mature political partisan" of Dutch liberal republicanism. The collapse of republicanism and the victory of the royalist party brought further disillusionment. Having become more reserved concerning democratic processes, and having decided that "every form of government could be made consistent with the life of free men," Spinoza devoted his time and efforts to deciding what was essential to any form of government which would make such a life possible.In his carefully crafted introduction to this new edition, Lewis Feuer responds to his critics, and reviews Spinoza's worldview in the light of the work of later scientists sympathetic to this own basic standpoint. He reviews Spinoza's arguments for the ethical and political contributions of the principle of determinism, and examines how these have guided, and at times frustrated, students and scholars of the social and physical sciences who have sought to understand and advance these disciplines.

The birth of modern science was linked to the rise in Western Europe of a new sensibility, that of the scientific intellectual. Such a person was no more technician, looking at science as just a job to be done, but one for whom the scientific stand-point is a philosophy in the fullest sense. In The Scientific Intellectual, Lewis S. Feuer traces the evolution of this new human type, seeking to define what ethic inspired him and the underlying emotions that created him.Under the influence of Max Weber, the rise of the scientific spirit has been viewed by sociologists as an offspring of the Protestant revolution, with its asceticism and sense of guilt acting as causative agents in the rise of capitalism and the growth of the scientific movement. Feuer takes strong issue with this view, pointing out how it is at odds with what we know of the psychological conditions of modern societies making for human curiosity and its expression in the observation of and experiment with nature.Feuer shows that wherever a scientific movement has begun, it has been based on emotions that issue in what might be called a hedonist-libertarian ethic. The scientific intellectual was a person for whom science was a ''new philosophy,'' a third force rising above religious and political hatreds, seeking in the world of nature liberated vision, a intending to use and enjoy its knowledge. In his new introduction to this brilliantly readable volume, Professor Feuer reviews the book''s critical reception and expands the scope of the original edition to include fascinating discussions of Francis Bacon, Thomas Edison, Charles Darwin, Thomas Hardy, and others. The Scientific Intellectual will be of interest to scientists and intellectual historians.

The birth of modern science was linked to the rise in Western Europe of a new sensibility, that of the scientific intellectual. Such a person was no more technician, looking at science as just a job to be done, but one for whom the scientific stand-point is a philosophy in the fullest sense. In The Scientific Intellectual, Lewis S. Feuer traces the evolution of this new human type, seeking to define what ethic inspired him and the underlying emotions that created him.Under the influence of Max Weber, the rise of the scientific spirit has been viewed by sociologists as an offspring of the Protestant revolution, with its asceticism and sense of guilt acting as causative agents in the rise of capitalism and the growth of the scientific movement. Feuer takes strong issue with this view, pointing out how it is at odds with what we know of the psychological conditions of modern societies making for human curiosity and its expression in the observation of and experiment with nature.Feuer shows that wherever a scientific movement has begun, it has been based on emotions that issue in what might be called a hedonist-libertarian ethic. The scientific intellectual was a person for whom science was a ''new philosophy,'' a third force rising above religious and political hatreds, seeking in the world of nature liberated vision, a intending to use and enjoy its knowledge. In his new introduction to this brilliantly readable volume, Professor Feuer reviews the book''s critical reception and expands the scope of the original edition to include fascinating discussions of Francis Bacon, Thomas Edison, Charles Darwin, Thomas Hardy, and others. The Scientific Intellectual will be of interest to scientists and intellectual historians.

The revival of ideology, which began early in the second half of the last century, has led to reconsideration of the following questions: What underlies the pattern of the rise and decline of the ideological mode of thought? What leads young intellectuals to search for an ideology? What accounts for the changes in ideological fashion over time and nation, and shifts from one set of philosophical tenets to another? Who indeed are the ""intellectuals?""Studies of ideology have tended to range themselves for or against particular viewpoints, or have concerned themselves with defining perspectives. The purpose of this book is to examine the common causal patterns in the development of various differing ideologies. Feuer finds that any ideology may be said to be composed of three ingredients: The most basic and invariant is some form of Mosaic myth. Every ideology also has its characteristic philosophical tenets spreading from left to right, which conform to the cycle of ideas; and, finally, an ideology must be taken up by some section of the population who can translate it into action.Intellectuals in generational revolt find in some version of the ideological myth a charter and dramatization of their emotions, aims, and actions. Since each generation of intellectuals tends to reject its predecessors' doctrines, a law of intellectual fashion arises the alternation of philosophical doctrines. Ideology has inevitably made for an authoritarian presumption on the part of master-intellectuals and marginal ones and assumes their antagonism to objective truth and science. It is Feuer's contention that only when intellectuals abandon ideology in favor of science or scholarship will an unfortunate chapter in the history of human unreasonbe overcome.

In this classic work the author undertakes to show how Spinoza's philosophical ideas, particularly his political ideas, were influenced by his underlying emotional responses to the conflicts of his time. It thus differs form most professional philosophical analyses of the philosophy of Spinoza. The author identifies and discusses three periods in the development of Spinoza's thought and shows how they were reactions to the religious, political and economic developments in the Netherlands at the time. In his first period, Spinoza reacted very strongly to the competitive capitalism of the Amsterdam Jews whose values were "so thoroughly pervaded by an economic ethics that decrees the stock exchange approached in dignity the decrees of God," and of the ruling classes of Amsterdam, and was led out only to give up his business activities but also to throw in his lot with the Utopian groups of the day. In his second period, Spinoza developed serious doubts about the practicality of such idealistic movements and became a "mature political partisan" of Dutch liberal republicanism. The collapse of republicanism and the victory of the royalist party brought further disillusionment. Having become more reserved concerning democratic processes, and having decided that "every form of government could be made consistent with the life of free men," Spinoza devoted his time and efforts to deciding what was essential to any form of government which would make such a life possible.In his carefully crafted introduction to this new edition, Lewis Feuer responds to his critics, and reviews Spinoza's worldview in the light of the work of later scientists sympathetic to this own basic standpoint. He reviews Spinoza's arguments for the ethical and political contributions of the principle of determinism, and examines how these have guided, and at times frustrated, students and scholars of the social and physical sciences who have sought to understand and advance these disciplines.

In this classic work the author undertakes to show how Spinoza''s philosophical ideas, particularly his political ideas, were influenced by his underlying emotional responses to the conflicts of his time. It thus differs form most professional philosophical analyses of the philosophy of Spinoza. The author identifies and discusses three periods in the development of Spinoza''s thought and shows how they were reactions to the religious, political and economic developments in the Netherlands at the time. In his first period, Spinoza reacted very strongly to the competitive capitalism of the Amsterdam Jews whose values were ""so thoroughly pervaded by an economic ethics that decrees the stock exchange approached in dignity the decrees of God,"" and of the ruling classes of Amsterdam, and was led out only to give up his business activities but also to throw in his lot with the Utopian groups of the day. In his second period, Spinoza developed serious doubts about the practicality of such idealistic movements and became a ""mature political partisan"" of Dutch liberal republicanism. The collapse of republicanism and the victory of the royalist party brought further disillusionment. Having become more reserved concerning democratic processes, and having decided that ""every form of government could be made consistent with the life of free men,"" Spinoza devoted his time and efforts to deciding what was essential to any form of government which would make such a life possible.In his carefully crafted introduction to this new edition, Lewis Feuer responds to his critics, and reviews Spinoza''s worldview in the light of the work of later scientists sympathetic to this own basic standpoint. He reviews Spinoza''s arguments for the ethical and political contributions of the principle of determinism, and examines how these have guided, and at times frustrated, students and scholars of the social and physical sciences who have sought to understand and advance these disciplines.

In this classic work the author undertakes to show how Spinoza''s philosophical ideas, particularly his political ideas, were influenced by his underlying emotional responses to the conflicts of his time. It thus differs form most professional philosophical analyses of the philosophy of Spinoza. The author identifies and discusses three periods in the development of Spinoza''s thought and shows how they were reactions to the religious, political and economic developments in the Netherlands at the time. In his first period, Spinoza reacted very strongly to the competitive capitalism of the Amsterdam Jews whose values were ""so thoroughly pervaded by an economic ethics that decrees the stock exchange approached in dignity the decrees of God,"" and of the ruling classes of Amsterdam, and was led out only to give up his business activities but also to throw in his lot with the Utopian groups of the day. In his second period, Spinoza developed serious doubts about the practicality of such idealistic movements and became a ""mature political partisan"" of Dutch liberal republicanism. The collapse of republicanism and the victory of the royalist party brought further disillusionment. Having become more reserved concerning democratic processes, and having decided that ""every form of government could be made consistent with the life of free men,"" Spinoza devoted his time and efforts to deciding what was essential to any form of government which would make such a life possible.In his carefully crafted introduction to this new edition, Lewis Feuer responds to his critics, and reviews Spinoza''s worldview in the light of the work of later scientists sympathetic to this own basic standpoint. He reviews Spinoza''s arguments for the ethical and political contributions of the principle of determinism, and examines how these have guided, and at times frustrated, students and scholars of the social and physical sciences who have sought to understand and advance these disciplines.

The revival of ideology, which began early in the second half of the last century, has led to reconsideration of the following questions: What underlies the pattern of the rise and decline of the ideological mode of thought? What leads young intellectuals to search for an ideology? What accounts for the changes in ideological fashion over time and nation, and shifts from one set of philosophical tenets to another? Who indeed are the ""intellectuals?""Studies of ideology have tended to range themselves for or against particular viewpoints, or have concerned themselves with defining perspectives. The purpose of this book is to examine the common causal patterns in the development of various differing ideologies. Feuer finds that any ideology may be said to be composed of three ingredients: The most basic and invariant is some form of Mosaic myth. Every ideology also has its characteristic philosophical tenets spreading from left to right, which conform to the cycle of ideas; and, finally, an ideology must be taken up by some section of the population who can translate it into action.Intellectuals in generational revolt find in some version of the ideological myth a charter and dramatization of their emotions, aims, and actions. Since each generation of intellectuals tends to reject its predecessors'' doctrines, a law of intellectual fashion arises the alternation of philosophical doctrines. Ideology has inevitably made for an authoritarian presumption on the part of master-intellectuals and marginal ones and assumes their antagonism to objective truth and science. It is Feuer''s contention that only when intellectuals abandon ideology in favor of science or scholarship will an unfortunate chapter in the history of human unreasonbe overcome.

The revival of ideology, which began early in the second half of the last century, has led to reconsideration of the following questions: What underlies the pattern of the rise and decline of the ideological mode of thought? What leads young intellectuals to search for an ideology? What accounts for the changes in ideological fashion over time and nation, and shifts from one set of philosophical tenets to another? Who indeed are the ""intellectuals?""Studies of ideology have tended to range themselves for or against particular viewpoints, or have concerned themselves with defining perspectives. The purpose of this book is to examine the common causal patterns in the development of various differing ideologies. Feuer finds that any ideology may be said to be composed of three ingredients: The most basic and invariant is some form of Mosaic myth. Every ideology also has its characteristic philosophical tenets spreading from left to right, which conform to the cycle of ideas; and, finally, an ideology must be taken up by some section of the population who can translate it into action.Intellectuals in generational revolt find in some version of the ideological myth a charter and dramatization of their emotions, aims, and actions. Since each generation of intellectuals tends to reject its predecessors'' doctrines, a law of intellectual fashion arises the alternation of philosophical doctrines. Ideology has inevitably made for an authoritarian presumption on the part of master-intellectuals and marginal ones and assumes their antagonism to objective truth and science. It is Feuer''s contention that only when intellectuals abandon ideology in favor of science or scholarship will an unfortunate chapter in the history of human unreasonbe overcome.

The revival of ideology, which began early in the second half of the last century, has led to reconsideration of the following questions: What underlies the pattern of the rise and decline of the ideological mode of thought? What leads young intellectuals to search for an ideology? What accounts for the changes in ideological fashion over time and nation, and shifts from one set of philosophical tenets to another? Who indeed are the ""intellectuals?""Studies of ideology have tended to range themselves for or against particular viewpoints, or have concerned themselves with defining perspectives. The purpose of this book is to examine the common causal patterns in the development of various differing ideologies. Feuer finds that any ideology may be said to be composed of three ingredients: The most basic and invariant is some form of Mosaic myth. Every ideology also has its characteristic philosophical tenets spreading from left to right, which conform to the cycle of ideas; and, finally, an ideology must be taken up by some section of the population who can translate it into action.Intellectuals in generational revolt find in some version of the ideological myth a charter and dramatization of their emotions, aims, and actions. Since each generation of intellectuals tends to reject its predecessors' doctrines, a law of intellectual fashion arises the alternation of philosophical doctrines. Ideology has inevitably made for an authoritarian presumption on the part of master-intellectuals and marginal ones and assumes their antagonism to objective truth and science. It is Feuer's contention that only when intellectuals abandon ideology in favor of science or scholarship will an unfortunate chapter in the history of human unreasonbe overcome.