The Closing of the American Mind

Rating:
Summary: Bloom deserves to be read more carefully
Review: When The Closing of The American Mind was published in 1987, it instantly ignited a firestorm of praise and condemnation. Conservatives hailed it as vindication of their long-ignored criticisms about American culture in general and higher education in particular. Liberals denounced it as elitist and intolerant, and they said Bloom wanted to keep students ignorant of other cultures so he could indoctrinate them with his. Neither side had it right. The Closing of The American Mind is, as Bloom put it in his preface, "a meditation on the state of our souls."

Both sides were wrong about the book because they didn't read it carefully enough. Liberals read Bloom's argument for philosophy as an attempt to purge non-white, non-European writers from the cannon on grounds of cultural purity. Conservatives read his plea as an attempt to run all the liberal professors out of academia and replace them with conservatives. But a careful reading of Bloom would quickly prove both of these interpretations false.

Bloom believed Plato's cave was culture, whether that culture was western or not (after all, it was Plato's description of his own culture that created the idea of the cave). Bloom's argument was that students should be forced to read the works of the great philosophers because those writers are the only ones who dealt with the fundamental question of life: what is man. Bloom believed it was the university's mission to equip students with the tools that would enable them to seek the answer to this question and to lead a philosophical life. Only the great philosophers were capable of introducing students to the deepest and most profound life, and without this introduction, students would forever remain in their respective caves.

Bloom never was a conservative, nor was he one who wished to impose his "culture" on others. Simply put, he was a scholar who wished to make his students think - to truly think - about the nature of their existence and of society. The goal of Bloom's book was to show how Americans of all political persuasions, social backgrounds and economic conditions are debating within a narrow modern world-view and have simply accepted as fact a mushy blend of modern theory that repeatedly contradicts itself and stands in sharp contrast to an almost entirely forgotten world of opposing thought: that of the ancients.

In other words, Americans are incapable of true self-examination and self-understanding because they are ignorant of ancient philosophy, which poses the only alternative to the modern concept of man. What Bloom does with The Closing of The American Mind is expose the great Oz by asking him life's deepest questions. Bloom asks the same questions of today's professors and students that the ancient philosophers asked of themselves and their students. He finds that not only does no one have an answer, but no one even understands the questions.

Bloom's confrontation exposes the modern American university for what it really is: one big self-esteem seminar where students are taught self-validation instead of self-examination. Professors are not forcing students to confront the most serious questions of life, but rather are handing them scrolls of paper certifying that the university has bestowed on them qualities which, in fact, they already possessed, those being "openness" and "tolerance."

Of students, Bloom writes, "The relativity of truth is not a theoretical insight but a moral postulate, the condition of a free society, or so they see it. They have all been equipped with this framework early on, and it is the modern replacement for the inalienable and natural rights that used to be the traditional grounds for a free society."

The university, he shows, does nothing to contest this belief, but feeds it instead. The end result is that there can be no more truth or goodness and no need or even ability to make tough choices. Where the purpose of higher education once was to enable the student to find truth, the modern university teaches that there is no truth, only "lifestyle."

There exist in the world polar opposites. Bloom lists "reason-revelation, freedom-necessity, democracy-aristocracy, good-evil, body-soul, self-other, city-man, eternity-time, being-nothing." Serious thought requires recognition of the existence of these opposites and the choice of one over the other. "A serious life means being fully aware of the alternatives, thinking about them with all the intensity one brings to bear on life-and-death questions, in full recognition that every choice is a great risk with necessary consequences that are hard to bear," Bloom says.

He argues persuasively that the modern university does not force students to confront these alternatives at all, much less seriously think about them. Therefore, the modern university fails in its purpose, which is to create students aware of the vast array of possibilities that life offers and capable of choosing the good life.

Bloom has been harshly, and is still continually, accused of trying to force his own ideology on his students. But even a cursory reading of The Closing of The American Mind will disprove this silly accusation. Bloom simply wanted to make students think, to make them understand that there are different ideas of what man is and that they must confront these ideas if they wish to lead a meaningful life. This, he believed, was the university's purpose because it is there and only there that students would be exposed to alternatives to the prevailing intellectual trends. Life will happen to the students, he said, they don't need the university to provide it for them. They need the university to equip them for making the choices that will lead them to the best, most fulfilling life - the philosophical life. It is precisely for this reason that universities exist, and it is precisely this task that they now fail to accomplish.

Bloom's book remains important a decade after its publication because of the depth of Bloom's intellect and the thoroughness of his analysis. Only the last third of The Closing of The American Mind focuses on the modern university. Bloom spends the first two-thirds of the book explaining the modern mind-set and contrasting it with the ancient and the enlightened. He demonstrates the shallowness of the modern mind by repeatedly beating it about the head with Aristotle, Plato, Rousseau, Tocqueville, Hobbes, Locke, Nietzsche, Kant, Hegel and Heidegger. With this tactic, Bloom tears apart the vapid pop psychology that passes as deep thought and holds up the shreds for the reader to see their thinness.

But Bloom's attack is also instruction. Through it he takes the reader on an intellectual history tour in which he tracks the evolution of modern thought. Focusing on key words in today's usage, such as "lifestyle," "relationship" and "commitment," he retraces them through history to discover their origins and their true meanings. He then contrasts these words with the ones they replaced, such as "duty," "honor," "love." The depth and complexity of the ancient concepts overpowers the shallow convenience of the modern ones. Bloom tells how, when he showed this contrast to his students, they didn't care. Worse, they recoiled at the very thought of being bound by duty or honor or love as opposed to being committed to relationships via contract.

This contrast is at the heart of Bloom's book: whether humans are truth-seeking creatures who live for the purpose of pleasing God and discovering the good, or whether they are truth-creating creatures who live only for the purpose of satisfying their animal needs and preventing the bad. Bloom believes the former, modernity the latter. Bloom knew that his book would not solve the question or ennoble America. But it would reintroduce the question, which is all that he wanted the university to do. It is tragic that, as he predicted, the universities would cast him out as a heretic instead of making themselves his disciples.

Rating:
Summary: The issue is relativism
Review: Alan Bloom begins his controversial book with this statement, "There is one thing a professor can be absolutely certain of: almost every student entering the university believes, or says he believes, that truth is relative... [This] is not a theoretical insight but a moral postulate... The students, of course, cannot defend their opinion... [but] to their way of thinking there should be no tolerance for the intolerant."

When I read that statement as a student, I was offended. Later (as I got on in years) I realized what he was trying to tell me. As a young and idealistic undergraduate I believed that one must stand up for what is right, be committed, get involved, and act against evil.

I also believed that truth and evil are relative.

I was being inconsistent and didn't notice it. That, of course, is Bloom's point too and he concludes from it that students are in error in their relativism and calls for an education focusing on Western values that will teach them better.

I think I was wrong but I would call for an education that would teach students about valid and invalid judgments. Let's face it: many of the students in our universities are NOT Western and, although it would be good for them (and for us) to learn about Western culture, that is not the only culture out there. We should all, however, learn about valid and invalid judgments; and we should all learn that it's okay to judge.

A valid judgment requires that I separate my own personal preferences from what I judge to be unversal standards. That's not an easy thing to do. But it means that I must separate my revulsion from certain foods and customs (say lip piercing) from a woman throwing herself on her husband's funeral pyre. The first is my cultural habituation; the second a universal value.

Yet when I make those judgments I must do so humbly knowing that they are made by MY standards for I don't really know any others. And for that reason, it would be good for me to learn what those standards are. It would be good for me to learn Western values.

And those, I'm afraid, are rarely taught these days.

So I agree with Bloom's starting point but the conclusion he draws from it is perhaps not the only one possible.

Rating:
Summary: Everyone talked about it, yet few really understood it.
Review: I was amazed that so many of my conservative friends purchased the Closing of the American Mind yet how few if any actually read it. I heard quotes from the book, yet they were always taken out of context and people referred to the book yet did not seem to know anything about it. I asked a PhD about the book and he only wanted to know whether the title was proper for the book, I guess he had not read it either.

Platonism is mentioned a lot in other reviews, my interest though is the acceptance of German Rationalism in America. de Tocqueville said that if America ceased to be good it would cease to be great. He said America was great because it was good. One book I was reading at the time was Sun Tzu'z Art of War, he states that when your enemy has accepted your ideas and philosophies he is no longer your enemy. Tzu mentions that when you come to fight, your enemy will not want to because there are no differences.

By our acceptance of German Rationalism have we forgotten what has made America great? Will we forget that although we have a common ancestry with Europe, we are a distinct people whose ancestors came here to escape the world that was Europe. Whether escaping religious persecution or a potato famine, those who came here sought the freedom that came with responsibility. This book called a Jeremiad may just be a warning still in this new millenium.

Rating:
Summary: A great critique, fabulous
Review: Blooms book is tough reading, challenging. THis book expects you, the student, to delve back into the classical times and into philosophy for understand. So far different from the light conservative reading of O'Reilly and so far different from the un-balanced unsubstantiated works of Michael Moore or Chomsky, this book requires you to think. Bloom explores many subjects facing the American college student and the developing of the American conscious. He points out the current trend(all too relevant today even though the book was written in the 80s) towards moral relativism. He notes how we as Americans ahve become so afraid of value judgements. He speaks about the inculcation of college students with all embrasing words like 'culture'. He also comments on the non-integraton of black students on college campus's despite the massive outreach efforts.

He notes the current distrust of classic texts and the current trend towards Satre and Marx on campus while noting the decline of emphasis on western thought and western civilization. This book is a great read, highly educational and of great value for todays student or young professional in understanding the lingo of the left. For a non-fiction biography of Bloom read Ravelstein by Saul Bellow.

Rating:
Summary: A response to Mr. Gudorf
Review: "But rock has one quality neither of the others do - it's still fresh. This is the point Bloom simply misses. People don't listen to rock because it's great, but because it's new. Bloom is simply unrealistic to expect a culture like ours that thrives on innovation to live only in the past; in fact, it would be unhealthy because it would lead to stagnation."

In response to Mr. Gudorf, Bloom's point is that Americans have no sense of the past, of the greatness of the whole western civilization that ultimately produced them. Thus they choose the new over the truly great, People Magazine over Shakespeare, and the Stones over Mozart. Freshness, the ability to be innovative, is indeed the American virtue, but we experience it at the expense of some other very precious virtues, many of which Bloom outlines in this book. To argue that living in the past (i.e. prefering classical to rock) is unhealthy and leads to stagnation is a most American response to Bloom. That very "stagnation" which Americans abhor is the climate that fosters the reflection of which genius is a product.

I first read Bloom as a college freshman in a colloquium my advisor signed me into against my will. I thought the book was only mildly interesting and barely relevant. I recently re-read it in my own leisure and realized the profundity of Bloom's arguments against a culture that suffocates greatness and thins the soil of the mind. I recommend it for parents (and those who plan to be) who want to raise children who are connected to a tradition and can think for themselves.

Rating:
Summary: Best Conservative Book I've Read
Review: Forget Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh, this guy is a real intellectual. Bloom is very direct in his criticism of the intellectual crisis in America, and it's getting worse since he wrote this book, with MTV, porn, video games..it's the dumming down of America right now and our forefathers would be shocked I think. He was right in so many areas, and his words are prophetic.

If the emphasis on pleasure beats out the emphasis on meaning, America will continue to have a very rocky road!

Bloom's observations on what is really going on in our campus's is startling and sometimes depressing. It was stunning to me that many college students are turning away from classical literature. We need more people like Allan Bloom, to "tell it like it is."

Jeffrey McAndrew
author of "Our Brown-Eyed Boy" and political moderate

Rating:
Summary: Yeah, but so what?
Review: My review is in regards to Mr. Bloom's chapter on the corruption brought about by rock music. I really wish I could find out what it is in rock 'n roll that Bloom says drives an individual towards sexual conquest because I haven't been laid in years. This book reads like an updated version of Plato's "Republic." He brings forth some perfectly valid and intelligent points, but by the end of it, I had to ask myself, "so what?" Bloom tells us we need to control new forms of popular entertainment, and even abolish some of it in order to provide only pure, moral art and entertainment that stimulates the intellect rather than lustful and dishonest emotions. Restricting freedom and encouraging nothing but cleanliness is also a form of fascism. Bloom would have made a much more convincing book had he written with more compassion than condemnation.

Rating:
Summary: The Purpose of True Education; Inner Directed Development
Review: A major impact in my thinking and an awesome introduction to Nietzsche, nihilism and the American education system. Bloom outlines what education was compared to what it is today. How cultures consisted of much more than mere nationalism, but rather, educated thinkers who influenced Western civilization from non-equalitarian societies. Bloom relates thoughts from Alex de Toquville and the problem of equalitarianism, the deterioration of the American educational system and the problem of nihilism. In doing this, Bloom, outlines the teachings of Nietzsche, Max Weber, Marx and other major thinkers that have dealt with such issues.

Weber's charisma, to Marx's rationalism to Nietzsche's culture, self-positing and value creating ability, using Heidegger's term of "authenticity," Bloom delivers a book that is worth every page and chapter. His outline of the 1960's turmoil that aided to both the extension of nihilism and the deterioration of the University is essential reading. The MBA has replaced true educational and cultural reflection that molds, shapes and infuses interior authenticity in individuals that in turn, form our leaders, thinkers and greats of our time period. But where are they today? Certainly a much smaller and obscure group that is both surrounded and smothered by external, outer-direction that fails to produce those great thinkers that have literally changed the course of Western civilization.

Bloom also ventures into morality, music and general social conditions that affect our American civilization and most certainly his students and the University, once a "sacred" place of character development, now a place where the classics have been shelved in the humanities, rejected by the scientific champions, only to find students - the back bone of future thinkers - to obtain more superfluous knowledge determined solely for financial success and material gain; external accomplishments devoid of internal character authenticity and inner-directed value positing.

Bloom's book should be read by every educator. The University that seriously values the original intent of such educational institutions since their inception have lost sight of direction.

Those that blow this book off as conservative verses liberal miss the entire theme of Bloom's complaint and value of the great minds that form our entire society and civilization.

Rating:
Summary: the emperor has no clothes
Review: Bad news from the groves of academe: the american university is failing to keep the wisdom of Aristotle, Rousseau and Nietzsche in the forefront of the undergraduate imagination. I was shocked, shocked. Along with a handful of insights, Professor Bloom has given us nearly four hundred pages of flapdoodle. The tone is nasty and condescending, the prose is impenetrable, and the net effects are relief when the book is finished and wonder at the fuss it has provoked. You can get the same message from Saul Bellow with some good belly laughs added. Bloom should have used Western Union.

Rating:
Summary: Bloom got the subtitle backwards
Review: What he seems to demonstrate is that democracy has failed higher education, not the reverse. His recurring theme is that the philosophic underpinnings of democracy have eliminated the concept of "truth" from society and replaced it with "values", thus ending the possibility for the university to serve as the explorer of truth.

He bemoans the fact that university administrators in the 1960's didn't have the backbone to protect what he sees as the higher calling of education, yet he demonstrates that American democracy makes this protection impossible.

Part One of the book is Bloom's musings on the flaccid state of American Culture. Part Two is a rather standard history of Western philosophy. One gets the impression that he simply typed out his lecture notes in order to get the book to 300+ pages.

Part Three is of interest. First, one sees the suprising vitriol and anger that he expresses towards fellow academicians (all those stories you heard in college about professorial rivalries must have ben true). Second, you get a glimpse at his bleak prognosis for philosophy in America and his rather tepid suggestions for remediation (read Plato).

If anything, the book proves that DeToqueville was right about America. We are not the contemplative sort. Maybe Bloom's Europeans will continue to provide us with good philosophy.