Statement of Purpose

Before I get started, a few things about my blog's title and why I chose it:



The title "Closed for Business" was inspired by Allan Bloom's The Closing of the American Mind. I read the book two years ago and its impact was profound. It cracked open the papier-mache crust of pop-culture sentiment and rock music aesthetics that insulated my mind, and dissolved the watery mastic of relativism holding those layers together. A criticism of modern higher education, and thus a criticism of most of modern life, The Closing of the American Mind revealed to me how much I didn't know about learning and philosophy, and how much I would never understand if I didn't alter my intellectual trajectory. Reading the book, I knew I wasn't a member of its intended audience, but rather a member of the herd Bloom so deftly criticized, those whose entrenched position in popular culture made the study of Plato, Aristotle and Rousseau seem so foreign and useless.



Having spent more than a decade fashioning a liberal-libertarian persona for myself, Bloom and thinkers like him were completely off my radar. I, like many of my age cohort, cast illusory spells of freedom for myself by chanting "Who am I to judge?" in every possible context. Bloom, and as I found out later, writers like Saul Bellow, asked the far scarier question: "Who are you not to?"



Like most ideas (good or otherwise) I thought of the title while taking a shower. I realized that I had something to say about being a closed American mind, and that attempting to broaden my intellectual life in the directions suggested by Bloom would produce thoughts and experiences worth sharing. I saw that my closed mind was giving me the chance to learn and share with others, putting me "in business" as it were. Thus "Closed for Business." Striking, I know. No need to applaud...



The subtitle comes from the fact that my conversion, while willing, isn't entirely enthusiastic. As I mentioned above, the question "Who are you not to judge?" is intimidating. Who really wants it asked of them? It is much easier and rhetorically gratifying to abdicate judgment of behaviors, decisions and pronouncements, and it saves face. But those who abdicate unwittingly condemn dusty old farts like Aristotle to remain in their graves (or tombs--or did they do those spooky funeral pyres back then?). How is that not passing judgment? Abdication also means avoiding arguments by creating artificial agreement: You see--neither of us really knows anything--who are we to say anything about the matter? Such awkward sleight-of-hand isn't consensus, nor is it even "agreeing to disagree." Whatever it is (and I have come to see it in myself as a manifestation of social cowardice) it confuses and detracts from the level of discourse. It doesn't help people to understand each other, and it mutes their discussion of important issues.



Taking a stand of any kind isn't fun. It's not something one does expecting pats on the back or letters of congratulation. Taking a conservative stand usually gets you the exact opposite of those things. Conservatives are mocked routinely for supposed stodginess and ignorance; they're the guys that form harrumphing choirs like those surrounding the Honorable William J. Le Petomane in Blazing Saddles. So, yeah, I'm not totally enthused about being pigeonholed and ridiculed. But what do you get if you make decisions for yourself using such criteria, anyway?



My intention (audacious? foolhardy?) here is to re-read Bloom and offer a gloss on his assessment of American minds from the standpoint of one that was most definitely closed in the manner he suggests. I operate under no illusions; my interest isn't in changing the world or the mind of anyone who may read what I post. Rather, my goal is to work through a dense tract of philosophy and leave a few crumbs along the trail for anyone else interested in taking it. Once the propeller on my thinking cap burns off, I'll write about other subjects as I read or encounter them.

So welcome! and wish me luck!