• Skip to main content
  • Skip to secondary menu
  • Skip to primary sidebar
Exterminating Angel Press

Exterminating Angel Press

Creative Solutions for Practical Idealists.

  • Home.
  • Our Books.
  • About Us.
    • What EAP’s About.
    • Why Exterminating Angel?
    • Becoming Part of the EAP Community.
    • EAP’s Poetry Editor Speaks!
    • Contributors.
    • EAP Press.
  • EAP: The Magazine.
    • EAP: The Magazine Archive
  • Tod Blog.
  • Jam Today.
  • Contact Us.
  • Cart.

Stumbling Toward Truth.

March 31, 2018 by Exangel

by Bruce Thompson.

In a time in which authoritative voices are derided as “fake news,” it has once again become fashionable to believe in truth. Our fascination with post-modern relativism has soured as we have experienced the practical effects of living in a social and political world utterly unencumbered by facts. But to reclaim our belief in truth, we must be careful not to fall back into the same naïve absolutism that gave rise to post-modernism in the first place. It is not enough merely to begin believing in facts again: we must find the happy synthesis that merges the thesis of absolutism with its antithesis of relativism.

When I was a young philosophy instructor one of the college counselors threw out a challenge to the faculty. He said, “Whatever you think you know about your field, there is a person of color in your field that you should be paying more attention to.” I felt pretty sure that I was an expert in my field, so I decided to take his challenge. I went to him and asked, “Who am I missing? Who have I overlooked?” He replied, “Have you ever heard of Alain Locke?” I hadn’t.

Alain Locke—not to be confused with the British philosopher, John Locke—was a student at Harvard University, studying under the same philosophers whom I considered to be my primary focus: the American pragmatists. I was entirely unaware of a philosopher in my own field of studies! As a student, Locke was awarded a Rhodes scholarship but was unable to attend the banquet in honor of recipients because he was African-American. He went on to found the philosophy department at Howard University. His writings in values theory, literary criticism, and art criticism were among the driving intellectual forces behind the Harlem Renaissance. Despite his obvious importance, he has been all but forgotten, merely because of the color of his skin. I have since tried to include Locke in my philosophy classes whenever possible.

Locke’s essay, “Pluralism and Ideological Peace,” is as relevant today as it was when it was written in 1947 (as his response to the escalating Cold War). In that essay Locke credits William James with the idea of “psychological pluralism,” the idea that we cannot use experience to settle disagreements, since our experiences are colored by our values. We simply do not see what we do not wish to see. Our values, in turn, come from various sources, but chiefly from our upbringing as part of a culture. People from different cultures may be unable to resolve their disagreements on questions of morality because they cannot even agree on the facts relevant to the question. Locke uses this line of reasoning to argue for the general acceptance of “cultural relativism,” i.e. the view that people from different cultures must be regarded as holding equally valid moral opinions. He hopes that one outcome of this general acceptance will be “ideological peace,” by which he means a state of society in which inevitable disagreements do not result in bloodshed, but only in mutual tolerance.

On a first reading, Locke appears to be making the case for post-modernism. In a sense, he is. But Locke’s argument is more subtle than it appears, and certainly much better than the argument given by such anthropologists as Melville Herskovitz and Ruth Benedict, who also defend “cultural relativism.” Their argument seems to be (1) that diversity of beliefs is an observable fact, (2) that diversity is therefore not a bad thing, and (3) that we should therefore adopt a universal attitude of tolerance. This argument is widely (and rightly) derided on a number of grounds. First, it is an example of the “naturalistic fallacy,” i.e. the fallacy of inferring that because something is the case, it therefore ought to be the case. It also urges a moral universal (the universal acceptance of tolerance), having just made the case that there are no moral universals!

Locke makes no such argument. Diversity is not just an observed fact. Because we interpret experience in light of our values, it is the more or less inevitable outcome of normal rational inquiry. He does not ask us to accept this diversity as “good” (or “not bad”); he merely asks us to consider the most practical, rational response to it. Efforts to stamp out diversity by force have been unsuccessful, even counterproductive; so, that doesn’t seem to be the best response. On the other hand, surrender to what he calls “values anarchy,” i.e. the view that values don’t really matter and that all beliefs are equally valid (and equally bogus), leaves us without a moral compass. This is not an acceptance of our opponents’ values so much as a rejection even of our own.

So, what is the most rational response? Locke urges that the first response must be a “sympathetic understanding of the bases of our value differences,” i.e. an inquiry into their “root causes.” For example, if I believe my shirt is green, while my friend believes it to be grey, it may advance mutual understanding to discover that my friend is color-blind. On a broader interpretation of the facts, my shirt is neither green nor grey. Color is perceived, and it is perceived differently by different people. Recognizing this broader truth in no way undermines the concept of truth; indeed, the broader understanding requires a concept of truth. It is simply true that our perceptions are equally valid. Being willing to extend this logic to an understanding of moral disagreements requires some courage, but the logic remains the same.

Locke believes that most disputes—including moral disputes—are ultimately resolvable, either by coming to mutual agreement or by coming to a mutual understanding of the valid reasons for the disparity. Locke holds out the possibility that some moral disputes may not be resolvable, but he never goes so far as to say this is inevitable. He merely says that some disputes appear not to be resolvable in the foreseeable future.

So, like scientists, we stumble toward truth by successive approximation, sometimes being right and often being wrong, but eventually correcting our errors, improving the state of our collective knowledge as we go, and (ideally) maintaining an attitude of peaceful tolerance and respect as the inquiry proceeds. My discovery of Alain Locke illustrates the point. I had believed I knew what there was to know about philosophers in the American pragmatist tradition. I was wrong. Being wrong is the price we sometimes have to pay for believing in truth; and, knowing that I might be wrong forces me to be tolerant of the opinions of others. On the other hand, since I believe in truth, I can insist that opinions be backed by evidence. My opponent cannot just throw out wild assertions, and try to undermine our shared reality by shouting “Fake news!” and singing “La la la la la.” I don’t need to tolerate that.

Filed Under: EAP: The Magazine, Spring 2018: Coloring.

Primary Sidebar

Cart.

Check Out Our Magazine.

In This Issue.

  • Who Was Dorothy?
  • Those Evil Spirits.
  • The Screaming Baboon.
  • Her.
  • A Tale of Persistence.
  • A Conversation with Steve Hugh Westenra.
  • Person Number Twelve.
  • Dream Shapes.
  • Cannon Beach.
  • The Muse.
  • Spring.
  • The Greatness that was Greece.
  • 1966, NYC; nothing like it.
  • Sun Shower.
  • The Withering Weight of Being Perceived.
  • Broken Clock.
  • Confession.
  • Francis Coppola’s Apocalypse.
  • Sometimes you die, I mean that people do.
  • True (from “My Life with Dogs”).
  • Fragmentary musings on birds and bees.
  • 12 Baking Essentials to Always Have in Your Poetry.
  • Broad Street.
  • A Death in Alexandria.
  • My Forked Tongue.
  • Swan Lake.
  • Long Division.
  • Singing against the muses.
  • Aphorisms from “What Remains to Be Said”.

In The News.

That cult classic pirate/sci fi mash up GREENBEARD, by Richard James Bentley, is now a rollicking audiobook, available from Audible.com. Narrated and acted by Colby Elliott of Last Word Audio, you’ll be overwhelmed by the riches and hilarity within.

“Captain Sylvestre de Greybagges is your typical seventeenth-century Cambridge-educated lawyer turned Caribbean pirate, as comfortable debating the virtues of William Shakespeare, Isaac Newton, and compound interest as he is wielding a cutlass, needling archrival Henry Morgan, and parsing rum-soaked gossip for his next target. When a pepper monger’s loose tongue lets out a rumor about a fleet loaded with silver, the Captain sets sail only to find himself in a close encounter of a very different kind.

After escaping with his sanity barely intact and his beard transformed an alarming bright green, Greybagges rallies The Ark de Triomphe crew for a revenge-fueled, thrill-a-minute adventure to the ends of the earth and beyond.

This frolicsome tale of skullduggery, jiggery-pokery, and chicanery upon Ye High Seas is brimming with hilarious puns, masterful historical allusions, and nonstop literary hijinks. Including sly references to Thomas Pynchon, Treasure Island, 1940s cinema, and notable historical figures, this mélange of delights will captivate readers with its rollicking adventure, rich descriptions of food and fashion, and learned asides into scientific, philosophical, and colonial history.”

THE SUPERGIRLS is back, revised and updated!

supergirls-take-1

In The News.

Newport Public Library hosted a three part Zoom series on Visionary Fiction, led by Tod.  

And we love them for it, too.

The first discussion was a lively blast. You can watch it here. The second, Looking Back to Look Forward can be seen here.

The third was the best of all. Visions of the Future, with a cast of characters including poets, audiobook artists, historians, Starhawk, and Mary Shelley. Among others. Link is here.

In the News.

SNOTTY SAVES THE DAY is now an audiobook, narrated by Last Word Audio’s mellifluous Colby Elliott. It launched May 10th, but for a limited time, you can listen for free with an Audible trial membership. So what are you waiting for? Start listening to the wonders of how Arcadia was born from the worst section of the worst neighborhood in the worst empire of all the worlds since the universe began.

In The News.

If you love audio books, don’t miss the new release of REPORT TO MEGALOPOLIS, by Tod Davies, narrated by Colby Elliott of Last Word Audio. The tortured Aspern Grayling tries to rise above the truth of his own story, fighting with reality every step of the way, and Colby’s voice is the perfect match for our modern day Dr. Frankenstein.

In The News.

Mike Madrid dishes on Miss Fury to the BBC . . .

Tod on the Importance of Visionary Fiction

Check out this video of “Beyond Utopia: The Importance of Fantasy,” Tod’s recent talk at the tenth World-Ecology Research Network Conference, June 2019, in San Francisco. She covers everything from Wind in the Willows to the work of Kim Stanley Robinson, with a look at The History of Arcadia along the way. As usual, she’s going on about how visionary fiction has an important place in the formation of a world we want and need to have.

Copyright © 2025 · Exterminating Angel Press · Designed by Ashland Websites