Bill Bennett Loses His 'Philosophicool'

The philosopher for everyone must understand that everyone is not a philosopher.

Detroit (PRWEB) October 7, 2005 -- A public philosopher who does not always think before he speaks is his own worst enemy. Consider, for example, William Bennett, the University of Texas-trained philosopher and former U.S. secretary of education. His recent comment about aborting every Black baby in order to reduce crime has, for many people, cost him whatever was left of his contentious credibility.

But dare this father of three Black babies point out that "Virtuous Bill" mentioned the appalling position not to espouse it, but to expose a weakness in utilitarian pro-life reasoning. A man had just called into Bennett's daily radio show and suggested that one might be against abortion on the grounds that it consists of taking the lives of humans who could make positive contributions to our economy in general and social security in particular.

Immediately recognizing that such reasoning "cuts both ways," Bennett informed the caller that he would not make such a philosophical argument against abortion. He then cautioned the caller to be careful with that kind of reasoning because someone could just as easily argue in favor of abortion on the grounds that certain individuals are likely to have a negative impact on society.

It was in this context that Bennett said, "I do know that it's true that if you wanted to reduce crime, you could, if that were your sole purpose, you could abort every Black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down." He quickly added that this would be "an impossible, ridiculous and morally reprehensible thing to do, but your crime rate would go down. So these far-out, these far-reaching, extensive extrapolations are, I think, tricky."

Philosophizing in public can be as "tricky" as the kind of defense of abortion Bennett raised and then rebutted. It is hazardous even, as thought police unwilling to do any real thinking work indefatigably to impose their ignorance and inanity on the very people they claim to protect and serve. But as Ohio writer Sim Evans observed, such is "the Politically Correct Society. It is an amorphous society, where the boundaries of acceptable speech are arbitrarily set by the chattering class and unevenly enforced by the sword of character assassination."

Thus, Bennett's faux pas was an ill-advised thought experiment. With the media more hungry than ever for revenue-generating sound bites rather than real substance, our country's centuries old racial divide distended by the New Orleans disaster, and Bennett's detractors desperate for dirt to bury him, his reductio ad absurdum could reduce his public image and influence to rubble. Having spent years in the public arena, he should have known better than to think aloud like a shock jock fresh out of Philosophy 101, and then expect anything other than angry and ad hominem reactions from certain vacuous voices of the people.

"As a philosopher," stated Bennett the next day, "I was showing the limitation of one argument by showing the absurdity of another." He showed something else, too - that truly political philosophers must approach sensitive issues with deep sensitivity and at least a modicum of marketing savvy. Otherwise, they will inject their own influence with invalidity and unwittingly perpetuate the image of deep thinkers as educated fools. And that, I assure you, is not 'philosophicool.'

bill bennett abortion blacks black baby black babies black children philosophy logic public intellectual political philosophy william bennett

Bookmark -  Del.icio.us | Furl It | Technorati | Ask | MyWeb | Propeller | Live Bookmarks | Newsvine | TailRank | Reddit | Slashdot | Digg | Stumbleupon | Google Bookmarks | Sphere | Blink It | Spurl