I have been reading articles on Eric Hoffer to discover more about him, and I was surprised, at least initially to see him referred to by various authors as a moral and social philosopher, and as a social critic.
The more I think about it, my mood changed and I agree with all these descriptors about Hoffer’s character and style of writing. He was a philosopher, and though atheistic, his willingness to dive into metaphysical and speculative issues are searches that a philosopher engages in.
He seemed like a social scientist in how well read he was and pulling odd facts from all over to make an argument, and to support his conclusions.
He was a moral philosopher, in part because he was certainly willing to take strong political and moral stands on a host of issues. He is not an overt ethicist, but his value judgments course through all his writings.
He was a moral philosopher too in that the logical extension of his moral system entails egoist morality.
Now today, 12/14/24, I looked up social critic in Wikipedia for a quick and dirty definition to work off of. Here is what was written in Wikipedia: “Social criticism is a form of academic or journalistic criticism focusing on social issues in contemporary society, in respect to perceived injustices and power relations in general.”
It would seem from this definition, that Hoffer the social critic was focusing on social issues in contemporary society; he did not seem to fight against social injustice, real or alleged, in America, but he was a staunch anti-Communist or at least anti-totalitarian.
His brilliant, original analysis of power relationships in The True Believer and The Ordeal of Change do reveal his take on power relationships at work in society.
No comments:
Post a Comment