Moral fundamentalists habitually act as if they have access to: (1) the exclusively right way to diagnose moral or political problems and (2) the single approvable practical solution to any particular problem. Building on the pragmatist tradition, I will argue that moral fundamentalism underwrites stupid decisions. In part, this is because it obstructs communication and constricts deliberation about what’s possible. But its implied methodology is even more worrisome, as it asks people to trust ends which are asserted autocratically. Instead of asking people to cooperatively trace varied consequences of the means being proposed, ends like liberty and justice are framed and understood as self-justifying finalities to be won at any price.
Steven Fesmire202fis202fProfessor of Philosophy and Chair of Philosophy & Religious Studies at Radford University. He is the author Beyond Moral Fundamentalism: Toward a Pragmatic Pluralism (Oxford University Press, 2024). He edited202fThe Oxford Handbook of Dewey202f(Oxford University Press, 2023), and his books202fJohn Dewey and Moral Imagination202f(Indiana University Press, 2003) and202fDewey202f(Routledge Press, 2015) won Choice “Outstanding Academic Title” awards. A 2009 Fulbright Scholar in Japan, Fesmire’s public philosophy work has appeared in places like Salon,202fThe Chronicle of Higher Education,202fInside Higher Ed, and The Humanist.
The Center for Dewey Studies is the home of research, publishing, and outreach focused on the life, work, and legacy of the American philosopher and educator John Dewey. Our Lunchtime Talks feature speakers researching Dewey and related thinkers, work in the pragmatist tradition, and work in a broadly Deweyan spirit.