Civic Humanism

1. Civic Humanism The basic suppositions: (1) Civic humanists believe that people are naturally politically inclined animals, (2) Civic humanists believe that people are disposed towards creating communities of common interest. (3) Civic humanists believe that people are disposed towards creating communities that serve the common good. (4) Civic humanists believe that the principal human behavior is political involvement, which involves investigation into and participation in the debates about how to achieve the common good.

2. Civic Humanism Civic Humanists on the “Truth”: The key difference between the civic humanist notion of truth and the foundationalist notion of truth can be understood by grasping two opposing epistemological terms: • Transcendentalism: the belief that truth exists apart from human and worldly affairs, so it will be the same always. • Contextualism: the belief that truth depends upon the circumstances in which one argues. An Illustration: A transcendentalist will argue that a given action (critical thinking, for example) is good for the human soul in all circumstances. The good life, then, for all history is the life of the philosopher. A contextualist will argue that the same action action (critical thinking) might be appropriate in a specific historical moment (during deliberative sessions when lawmakers are hammering out the details of a piece of legislation), but deleterious in another historical moment (at the precipice of war when decisive action is required in order to avoid great bloodshed).

3. Civic Humanism Civic Humanists on the “Good Life”: Since civic humanists tend towards a contextualist understanding of truth, they do not tend towards a universal belief about what constitutes the good life. At various historical moments, different political formations and different customs might be preferable. • Qualification: This does not mean that civic humanists are opposed to any sense of what is right or wrong--they are opposed to a universal ideal of social interaction. • Qualification: This does not mean that civic humanists are political relativists--they do believe that people are inclined towards forming communities that serve the public good through active political action that all citizens engage. A Word (on) “Action”: “Action” is a term coined by philosopher Hannah Arendt to denote the ideal of human existence, an ideal that includes active participation in political affairs. Arendt, herself a 20th-century civic humanist, believed that people are inclined towards and most fully achieving their potential when fully engaging in public affairs. For the civic humanist, the good life involves “action,” though there is no guarantee that this action will pursue a specific political agenda or a specific form of social involvement.

4. Civic Humanism Civic Humanists on “Good Government”: Since civic humanists tend to be contextualists, they rarely champion one form of good government. Civic humanists in the past have been aristocrats, oligarchs, radical democrats, and technocrats. • Qualification: One of the chief differences among civic humanist forms of government involves the category of “citizen.” Civic humanists agree that all citizens deserve the ability to act politically, but they often disagree about who counts as citizens (and as a result who counts as fully human). Laborers, slaves, women, people of color, and many others have been excluded from governments based on civic humanist principles • Qualification: Civic humanists as a whole tend to oppose tyranny (though not necessarily monarchy). Tyranny puts all potential for action in the hands of one citizen, and it is a political formation designed to serve the tyrant, not the popular good. Monarchy leaves agency available to many (like those included in a royal court) and can benefit the public as a whole.

5. Civic Humanism Civic Humanists on Education: Since civic humanists place so much stock in the citizens’ investment in their political order, they tend also to believe that a government depends largely on its citizens’ virtue. They almost invariably argue for some educational program to teach people how to be good citizens • Qualification: Education in virtue does not mean moralistic inculcation. Civic virtue might include an emphasis on the importance of voting or of following public debates, without ever delving into issues of private concern like sexual proclivity. • Qualification: Education in virtue may mean teaching different virtues at different times. • Qualification: For the civic humanist, virtue is not something that we hold inwardly. It is something what we perform publicly. You become virtuous be being virtuous. Rhetorical Education: Since political action largely happens through public argument civic humanists almost invariably believe strongly in teaching citizens the manners of effective and virtuous public argument. Rhetoric is a cornerstone of teaching and practicing citizen virtue. Rhetorical education and good rhetorical practice maintain the integrity of citizen virtue and therefore of the state.

6. Civic Humanism Civic Humanists on Rhetorical Education: By teaching citizens the tools of rhetorical interaction, we teach them to be virtuous and to uphold the state through public argument. • Tools: Rhetorical education must involve the tricks of effective public argument as well as the critical ability to spot spurious arguments. This is the kind of stuff that Sophists taught to their students • Tradition: Rhetorical education must involve knowledge of one’s society and government and the ability to build on and emulate past virtuous orators. For the civic humanist, rhetorical education typically involves not only instruction in the means of effective oratory, but also in broader areas like law, history, philosophy, etc. • Critical Thought: Since civic humanists are typically epistemological contextualists, they are often resistant to any notion that there is a universal good or truth, but they are often open to the notion that there might be a better course of action or belief in a moment. Identifying that course of action is difficult. Since there is no absolute standard, we must offer the student the ability to think critically and carefully through all facets of an issue. This is a rhetorical labor.

7. Civic Humanism Civic Humanists vs. Liberals (a quick comparison): In contrast to the civic humanist, the liberal believes that the ultimate goal of political behavior is the individual’s ability to pursue her own private joy and well-being without impinging on others’ abilities to do the same. • Virtue (public or private): While civic humanist rhetors tend to preach citizen virtue as a public quality, liberals tend to imagine it as a private concern, not something worth public action or (sometimes) deliberation. • Freedom to and Freedom from: For the civic humanist, “freedom” means the ability to participate in public action--that’s “freedom to” do something. For the liberal, “freedom” means shelter from restrictions imposed by other individuals or the state--that’s “freedom from” something. Civic humanists worry about rhetorically performed virtue and deference to tradition in public argument. Liberals worry about freedom of speech and thought in public argument. • Public and Private: For the civic humanist, the private sphere is an atrophied space where people can hide from public activity for a short while. Human joy is pursued in public actions. For the liberal, the public sphere is an atrophied space where people deal with the small handful of issues that concern everyone’s freedoms. Human joy is pursued in private actions.