AULA PPE 2011.1 AAULA PPE 2011.1 A

RACIONALIDADE RACIONALIDADE MONOLÓGICA MONOLÓGICA CARTESIANACARTESIANA

AS ORIGENS DA AS ORIGENS DA RACIONALIDADE QUE SUBJAZ RACIONALIDADE QUE SUBJAZ AO PLANEJAMENTO TÉCNICOAO PLANEJAMENTO TÉCNICO

PROMETHEUS PERPLEXEDPROMETHEUS PERPLEXED

GELLNER, ERNEST, “Prometheus GELLNER, ERNEST, “Prometheus Perplexed”Perplexed” ”  in JARVIE, Ian & ”  in JARVIE, Ian & LAOR, N. (eds.), Critical Rationalism, LAOR, N. (eds.), Critical Rationalism, the Social Sciences and the the Social Sciences and the Humanities. Essays/or Humanities. Essays/or Joseph Joseph AgassiAgassi, Vol. II, 3-18. © 1995 Kluwer , Vol. II, 3-18. © 1995 Kluwer Academic PublishersAcademic Publishers

CARTESIAN RATIONALISMCARTESIAN RATIONALISMAND AUTONOMYAND AUTONOMY

““One of the central theme, perhaps One of the central theme, perhaps indeed the central obsession, of indeed the central obsession, of Cartesian rationalism is the Cartesian rationalism is the aspiration for autonomy […]. aspiration for autonomy […]. [GELLNER,1999:3] [GELLNER,1999:3]

CARTESIAN CARTESIAN RATIONALISMRATIONALISM

““Man makes himself, and he Man makes himself, and he does so does so rationallyrationally. .

[GELLNER,1999:3][GELLNER,1999:3]

CARTESIAN RATIONALISMCARTESIAN RATIONALISM

Cultural accumulation is irrational: it Cultural accumulation is irrational: it is a blind process […]is a blind process […] [GELLNER,1999:3][GELLNER,1999:3]

CARTESIAN RATIONALISMCARTESIAN RATIONALISM

What you have not made and tested What you have not made and tested yourself, you cannot trust. yourself, you cannot trust. [GELLNER,1999:3] [GELLNER,1999:3]

CARTESIAN RATIONALISM CARTESIAN RATIONALISM

The unexamined inheritance of mere The unexamined inheritance of mere custom and examplecustom and example, of the jetsam , of the jetsam of history, of the bank of custom of a of history, of the bank of custom of a culture, can never satisfy the culture, can never satisfy the stringent rationalist criteria.. stringent rationalist criteria.. [GELLNER,1999:3] [GELLNER,1999:3]

CARTESIAN RATIONALISMCARTESIAN RATIONALISM

Autonomy requires reason, and Autonomy requires reason, and reason requires autonomy. reason requires autonomy. [GELLNER,1999:3] [GELLNER,1999:3]

PROMETHEAN PROMETHEAN ASPIRATION AND THE ASPIRATION AND THE

COSMIC EXILE COSMIC EXILE

PROMETHEAN ASPIRATION AS PROMETHEAN ASPIRATION AS AN COSMIC EXILEAN COSMIC EXILE

““To what extent can this Promethean To what extent can this Promethean aspiration to autarchy and self-aspiration to autarchy and self-creation be satisfied ? The answer is creation be satisfied ? The answer is simple. simple. It cannotIt cannot. [GELLNER, 1999:5]. [GELLNER, 1999:5]

PROMETHEAN ASPIRATION AS PROMETHEAN ASPIRATION AS AN EXILE COSMICAN EXILE COSMIC

!We cannot, as Descartes in effect planned !We cannot, as Descartes in effect planned and desired, excogitate ourselves and desired, excogitate ourselves ex ex nihilonihilo. We cannot think up, from the . We cannot think up, from the recesses of our private consciousness, recesses of our private consciousness, both the criteria and the tools required for both the criteria and the tools required for the erection of a new conceptual and the erection of a new conceptual and cognitive edifice, destined no longer to be cognitive edifice, destined no longer to be a beholden to any prior history. [GELLNER, a beholden to any prior history. [GELLNER, 1999:5]1999:5]

COSMIC EXILE vs. COSMIC EXILE vs. PROVIDENTIALISTSPROVIDENTIALISTS

Such an aspiration towards such a Such an aspiration towards such a “cosmic exile” is pervasive in the “cosmic exile” is pervasive in the history of modern Western thought. history of modern Western thought. [GELLNER,1999:3] [GELLNER, [GELLNER,1999:3] [GELLNER, 1999:5]1999:5]

COSMIC EXILE COSMIC EXILE the mith of a new king of the mith of a new king of

cultureculture The Cosmic Exile the opting out of The Cosmic Exile the opting out of

culture, is impracticable. But it culture, is impracticable. But it constitutes the noble and wholly constitutes the noble and wholly appropriate charter or myth of a new appropriate charter or myth of a new kind of culture, a new system of a kind of culture, a new system of a distinctively distinctively CartesianCartesian kind of Custom kind of Custom and Example. Custom was not and Example. Custom was not transcended: transcended: but a new kind ofbut a new kind of custom custom altogether was initiatedaltogether was initiated. [GELLNER, . [GELLNER, 1999:5]1999:5]

COSMIC EXILECOSMIC EXILEinitiated and made possible na initiated and made possible na

age totally unprecendentage totally unprecendent ““The separation of referential cognition from The separation of referential cognition from

other activities, the systematic submission of other activities, the systematic submission of cognitive claim to a severely extra-social cognitive claim to a severely extra-social centralized court of appeal, (under the slogan of centralized court of appeal, (under the slogan of “clear and distinct ideas,’ or of “experience”) “clear and distinct ideas,’ or of “experience”) and the establishment of a single currency of and the establishment of a single currency of reference, had burst open the limits of reference, had burst open the limits of knowledge. It initiated and made possible an knowledge. It initiated and made possible an age of totally unprecedent, fabulous cognitive age of totally unprecedent, fabulous cognitive and economic growth. Through its and economic growth. Through its associated technology, it brought the associated technology, it brought the Malthusian age to an end. Henceforth resources Malthusian age to an end. Henceforth resources would, and generally did, grow faster than would, and generally did, grow faster than population. [GELLNER, 1999:5]population. [GELLNER, 1999:5]

COSMIC EXILECOSMIC EXILEinitiated and made possible na initiated and made possible na

age totally unprecendentage totally unprecendent

Through its associated Through its associated technology, it brought the technology, it brought the Malthusian age to an end. Malthusian age to an end. Henceforth resources would, and Henceforth resources would, and generally did, grow faster than generally did, grow faster than population. [GELLNER, 1999:5]population. [GELLNER, 1999:5]

DESCARTESDESCARTES Descartes was wrong in supposing that he Descartes was wrong in supposing that he

could liberate himself from culture, from could liberate himself from culture, from custom and example. The truth of the matter custom and example. The truth of the matter is that what was emerging was a radically is that what was emerging was a radically different new kind of culture, a new custom different new kind of culture, a new custom which he helped codify. which he helped codify. But it was not But it was not simply one further culture amongst simply one further culture amongst others. It was new king, and was built on others. It was new king, and was built on wholly new principles. All the same , it wholly new principles. All the same , it was a culture, rather than a was a culture, rather than a transcendence of all culture, as Descartes transcendence of all culture, as Descartes had supposed. [GELLNER, 1999:6]had supposed. [GELLNER, 1999:6]

DESCARTES DESCARTES A new king of society had engendered A new king of society had engendered

a new species of compulsiona new species of compulsion

It had its own and distinctive It had its own and distinctive compulsions, and they too had their compulsions, and they too had their social roots, as Weber taught. A new social roots, as Weber taught. A new king of society had engendered a new king of society had engendered a new species of compulsion, and it was in species of compulsion, and it was in turn sustained by them [...] under the turn sustained by them [...] under the guise of an account of the human mind guise of an account of the human mind a such, they give us a portrait, from a such, they give us a portrait, from the inside, of the unique new kind of the inside, of the unique new kind of Custom and Example. [GELLNER, Custom and Example. [GELLNER, 1999:6]1999:6]

DESCARTESDESCARTESThe practice of scrutiny-by-doubt as an The practice of scrutiny-by-doubt as an

means of conceptual purificationmeans of conceptual purification The practice of scrutiny-by-doubt, which Descartes The practice of scrutiny-by-doubt, which Descartes

proposed as a means of conceptual purification, is in proposed as a means of conceptual purification, is in fact an excellent customs procedure for vetting what fact an excellent customs procedure for vetting what could, and what could not be granted an entry point could, and what could not be granted an entry point into the new culture […][GELLNER, 1999:6] into the new culture […][GELLNER, 1999:6]

The logical compulsion which owes nothing to The logical compulsion which owes nothing to culture, and which can consequently give us a vision culture, and which can consequently give us a vision of nature valid for all cultures and rooted in none, of nature valid for all cultures and rooted in none, are in the end quite simple: the givenness of are in the end quite simple: the givenness of datadata, , (present in Descartes´ thought as the immediate (present in Descartes´ thought as the immediate availability of the thinking substance to itself), plus availability of the thinking substance to itself), plus the simple logical principle that no generalisation the simple logical principle that no generalisation incompatible with data may be accepted. incompatible with data may be accepted. [GELLNER, 1999:6/7] [GELLNER, 1999:6/7]

DESCARTESDESCARTES a vision of nature valid for all cultures and rooted a vision of nature valid for all cultures and rooted

in none in none

The logical compulsion which owes nothing The logical compulsion which owes nothing to culture, and which can consequently give to culture, and which can consequently give us a vision of nature valid for all cultures us a vision of nature valid for all cultures and rooted in none, are in the end quite and rooted in none, are in the end quite simple: the givenness of simple: the givenness of datadata, (present in , (present in Descartes´ thought as the immediate Descartes´ thought as the immediate availability of the thinking substance to availability of the thinking substance to itself), plus the simple logical principle that itself), plus the simple logical principle that no generalisation incompatible with data no generalisation incompatible with data may be accepted. [GELLNER, 1999:6/7] may be accepted. [GELLNER, 1999:6/7]

DESCARTESDESCARTES The Crusoe Style of Cognition The Crusoe Style of Cognition

““So the heroic erection of an entire So the heroic erection of an entire world by a single individual, the world by a single individual, the Crusoe style of cognition, the use of Crusoe style of cognition, the use of naught but his own and self-tested naught but his own and self-tested and self-produced resources, is and self-produced resources, is indeed impossible. [GELLNER, indeed impossible. [GELLNER, 1999:7] 1999:7]

CRUSOE/DESCARTESCRUSOE/DESCARTESnew man vs. new worldnew man vs. new world

““How did we build this new world ? It was How did we build this new world ? It was built up by new men imbued by the built up by new men imbued by the Crusoe/Descartes spirit. Robinson Crusoe Crusoe/Descartes spirit. Robinson Crusoe was a man who carried the essential part of was a man who carried the essential part of his culture in himself and could re-erect it his culture in himself and could re-erect it on the island on his own. He needs no on the island on his own. He needs no complementary fellow-specialists, whose complementary fellow-specialists, whose zone of competence he is ritually or legally zone of competence he is ritually or legally barred from entering. In other words, all barred from entering. In other words, all the specialism of his culture employ the the specialism of his culture employ the same idiom, which he has mastered, and same idiom, which he has mastered, and they are open to him. [GELLNER, 1999:7] they are open to him. [GELLNER, 1999:7]

DESCARTESDESCARTES new king of culture, a new new king of culture, a new

king of epistemic constitutionking of epistemic constitution

““But the almost-as-heroic But the almost-as-heroic establishment of a new king of culture, establishment of a new king of culture, endowed with a new king of epistemic endowed with a new king of epistemic constitution, was possible, and it did constitution, was possible, and it did take place. We were bound to fail, but take place. We were bound to fail, but we were also bound to try; and the we were also bound to try; and the effort bore magnificent fruit, even if it effort bore magnificent fruit, even if it was not all that the founder Rationalist was not all that the founder Rationalist had proposed.. [GELLNER, 1999:7]had proposed.. [GELLNER, 1999:7]

DESCARTESDESCARTES

The abortive effort defined a The abortive effort defined a new civilizationnew civilization

[GELLNER, 1999:7][GELLNER, 1999:7]

DESCARTES/CRUSOEDESCARTES/CRUSOE

A RADICALLY NEW SOCIAL A RADICALLY NEW SOCIAL ORDER ORDER

A RADICALLY NEW SOCIAL A RADICALLY NEW SOCIAL ORDERORDER

““But to say this is But to say this is notnot to reduce the to reduce the philosophical content of individualist philosophical content of individualist rationalism to its social role. rationalism to its social role. GELLNER, 1999:7] GELLNER, 1999:7]

DESCARTESDESCARTESthe manner in which the new the manner in which the new

social order workssocial order works

This is not a sociologically This is not a sociologically reductionist position. The reductionist position. The philosophical content genuinely philosophical content genuinely illuminates the manner in which the illuminates the manner in which the new social order works: it really is new social order works: it really is individualist, and it is based on individualist, and it is based on genuine and cumulative knowledge. genuine and cumulative knowledge. [GELLNER, 1999:7] [GELLNER, 1999:7]

DESCARTES AND THE DESCARTES AND THE RATIONALISTS RATIONALISTS

CONTRADICTION CONTRADICTION

“ “ […] the wants to produce […] the wants to produce knowledge from his own resources, knowledge from his own resources, and he also wants it to refer to and he also wants it to refer to something objective. [GELLNER, something objective. [GELLNER, 1999:8]1999:8]

RATONALISMRATONALISMcognitive self-made man cognitive self-made man

vs.pursuit of transcendencevs.pursuit of transcendence

““A conspicuous feature of A conspicuous feature of Rationalism was its aspiration for Rationalism was its aspiration for cognitive self-reaction: the cognitive self-reaction: the rationalist desires to be a totally rationalist desires to be a totally self-self-made-man […]made-man […]. […] Th. […] The second e second closely related and equally closely related and equally important, trait is the pursuit of important, trait is the pursuit of transcendencetranscendence. [GELLNER, 1999:8]. [GELLNER, 1999:8]

RATONALISMRATONALISMcognitive self-made man cognitive self-made man

vs.pursuit of transcendencevs.pursuit of transcendence

Rationalism unquestionably conceives Rationalism unquestionably conceives knowledge as the attainment of knowledge as the attainment of something external and independent: it something external and independent: it must not be merely something which is, must not be merely something which is, so to speak, internally spawned by the so to speak, internally spawned by the organism. This would seem to organism. This would seem to constitute a contradiction: the rationalist constitute a contradiction: the rationalist wants to produce knowledge from his wants to produce knowledge from his own resources, and he also wants it to own resources, and he also wants it to refer to something objective. But it is refer to something objective. But it is not. [GELLNER, 1999:8]not. [GELLNER, 1999:8]

AUTONOMY VS. AUTONOMY VS. TRANSCEDENCE TRANSCEDENCE

““[…] So there is a kind of paradox: the […] So there is a kind of paradox: the citizen of a rational order claims citizen of a rational order claims autonomy precisely because the autonomy precisely because the contents of his knowledge, the cognitive contents of his knowledge, the cognitive claims he makes, are totally independent claims he makes, are totally independent of him. He did not of him. He did not make it upmake it up: he : he found found it. You might have expected the it. You might have expected the opposite. You might have expected the opposite. You might have expected the autonomous agent to autonomous agent to createcreate this object. this object. Not so. But the paradox is only apparent. Not so. But the paradox is only apparent. [GELLNER, 1999:8][GELLNER, 1999:8]

AUTONOMY VS. TRANSCEDENCEAUTONOMY VS. TRANSCEDENCE a kind of paradoxa kind of paradox

““[…] So there is a kind of paradox: the […] So there is a kind of paradox: the citizen of a rational order claims citizen of a rational order claims autonomy precisely because the autonomy precisely because the contents of his knowledge, the cognitive contents of his knowledge, the cognitive claims he makes, are totally independent claims he makes, are totally independent of him. He did not of him. He did not make it upmake it up: he : he found found it. You might have expected the it. You might have expected the opposite. You might have expected the opposite. You might have expected the autonomous agent to autonomous agent to createcreate this object. this object. Not so. But the paradox is only apparent. Not so. But the paradox is only apparent. [GELLNER, 1999:8][GELLNER, 1999:8]

CARTESIAN/EMPRICIST CARTESIAN/EMPRICIST METHODMETHOD

““They observe the rules of what may be They observe the rules of what may be called Cartesian/empiricist method: called Cartesian/empiricist method: separation of all questions and issues and, separation of all questions and issues and, second, the subjection of all claims to tests second, the subjection of all claims to tests of all questions and issues and, second, the of all questions and issues and, second, the subjection of all claims to tests not under subjection of all claims to tests not under their own control. This, in conjunction their own control. This, in conjunction with the strong implusion to generality and with the strong implusion to generality and order, seems to have engendered a form of order, seems to have engendered a form of knowledge of astonishing power, and one knowledge of astonishing power, and one not linked to any cultural system. not linked to any cultural system. [GELLNER, 1999, 8/9][GELLNER, 1999, 8/9]

CARTESIAN/EMPIRICIST CARTESIAN/EMPIRICIST METHODMETHOD

It appears that if the world is to be knowable It appears that if the world is to be knowable at all, it will yield to this strategy alone. at all, it will yield to this strategy alone. That it is knowable at all, that it does That it is knowable at all, that it does surrender its secrets to such a strategy, if to surrender its secrets to such a strategy, if to no other, is a miracle. The question no other, is a miracle. The question concerning why it should be such a world concerning why it should be such a world cannot be answered by the deployment of cannot be answered by the deployment of that strategy itself. As there is no other that strategy itself. As there is no other method, it must remain a secret for us. method, it must remain a secret for us. [GELLNER, 1999, 8/9][GELLNER, 1999, 8/9]

KARL MARX, KARL MARX, HOLY GHOST AND HOLY GHOST AND PROVIDENTIALISMPROVIDENTIALISM

COSMIC EXILE vs. COSMIC EXILE vs. PROVIDENTIALISTSPROVIDENTIALISTS

““The Providentialists try to provide The Providentialists try to provide an alternative to Cosmic Exile […] an alternative to Cosmic Exile […] [GELLNER, 1999:5][GELLNER, 1999:5]

KARL MARX AND HOLY GHOSTKARL MARX AND HOLY GHOST

An ProvidentialistsAn Providentialists ““Marx was one of the many Marx was one of the many

Providentialists: he could deride the Providentialists: he could deride the aspiration to stand outside society aspiration to stand outside society and to tell it where to go. He could and to tell it where to go. He could do so because he believed that he do so because he believed that he had access to knowledge concerning had access to knowledge concerning where it where it mustmust go .. [GELLNER, go .. [GELLNER, 1999:4] 1999:4]

KARL MARX AND HOLY GHOSTKARL MARX AND HOLY GHOST

An ProvidentialistsAn Providentialists

““We could trust the World-Process, … We could trust the World-Process, … we can trust “revolutionising we can trust “revolutionising practice” , his version of the Holy practice” , his version of the Holy Ghost. [GELLNER, 1999:4] Ghost. [GELLNER, 1999:4]