Good column here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/27/opinion/27brooks.html?hp
Who are the institutionalists? I see them at work, in various functions. There is something impressive about them. They seek to fill a role, to be someone--despite the fact that that someone has already existed.
This relates to Plato's forms: the idea that there is an essential essence to everything: for every woman an ideal woman, for every table, a perfect table. These forms, of course, limit themselves to the realm of mind. There is no ideal table, or basketball player, or woman for that matter. Yet the institutionalist can see the ideal. World record holding runners see it. Overachieving teachers see it.
The existential path is more immediately attractive. What is the purpose of seeking an ideal when meaning only exists where you make it? If you can't find your own bearings in this world, what use is there in finding excellence in the bearings of others?
Brooks is too smart to be republican.
No comments:
Post a Comment