Holte's corner

Modern Sophists

In her opening chapter on "The Origins of Totalitarianism" Hannah Arendt talks about the sophists of ancient times and compares them to those of these modern
times and she concludes:

"The most striking difference between ancient and modern sophists is that the ancients were satisfied with a passing victory of the arguments at the expense of truth, whereas the moderns want a more lasting victory at the expense of reality. In other words, one destroyed the dignity of human thought whereas the others destroy the dignity of human action. The old manipulators of logic were the concern of the philosopher, whereas the modern manipulators of facts stand in the way of the historian. For history itself is destroyed, and its comprehensibility -- based upon the fact that it is enacted by men and therefore can be understood by men -- is in danger, whenever facts are no longer held to be part and parcel of the past and present world, and are misused to prove this or that opinion.¹"

Obviously this bears on arguments in the present time as well. This passage struck me deeply, and came to mind during an argument I was having over Jimmy Carter's recent criticism of the president. In both cases, people were torturing language and reality to make violent claims justifying violent actions. In our times Carter is denouncing Torture in no uncertain terms....

CNN reported:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0710/10/sitroom.03.html ²

"In one interview yesterday, Carter accused President Bush of
abandoning the basic principles of human rights, engaging in torture,
and lying about it. In another, he called Vice President Cheney a
disaster for our country and a militant who is "trying again to
promote once again what might well be a counterproductive and
catastrophic military venture."

BLITZER: "President Bush said as recently as this week the United
States does not torture detainees."

CARTER: "That's not an accurate statement. If you use the
international norms of torture as has always been honored, certainly
in the last 60 years, since the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
was promulgated."

"But you can make your own definition of human rights and say, we
don't violate them. And we can -- you can make your own definition of
torture and say we don't violate it."

BLITZER: "But by your definition, you believe the United States, under
this administration, has used torture."

CARTER: "I don't think it, I know it, certainly."

BLITZER: "So is the president lying?"

CARTER: "The president is self-defining what we have done and
authorized in the torture of prisoners, yes.³"

Someone responded to my quote of this with the following complaint:

"He also says that Israel is the aggressor and the Palestinians are the
victims. Go figure."

But of course, the fact that we disagree about evaluations, opinions, doesn't change the facts. Carter has facts that prove his case. I may disagree strongly with Carters opinions about those facts -- but that doesn't change them or diminish the need to take heed of them.⁴

Footnotes and further readings.

1. Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarinianism, http://www.amazon.com/Origins-Totalitarianism-Hannah-Arendt/dp/0156701537" page 9, paragraph 2
2. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2007/10/11/BL2007101101038.htm\ l?hpid=opinionsbox1
3. Video: http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2007/10/10/tsr.carter.int.cnn
4. transcript: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0710/10/sitroom.03.html

Posted by cholte at October 11, 2007 11:48 PM