Chapter 9 And Chapter 10 Charles Taylor

Front 1

1. Which of the three initial “malaises” of modernity is focused of this chapter?

Back 1

(Pg 93) This chapter focuses on the malaise of instrumental reason.

Front 2

2. How do the knockers and boosters differ on the question of technology?

Back 2

(Pg 94) The knockers of technology think that the coming of technological civilization as a kind of unmitigated decline: We have lost contact with ourselves, and natural being, driven by an imperative of domination that condemns us to ceaseless battle. “Disenchantment”
(Pg 95) The boosters think that there is a fix for all our human problems, and are impatient of those who stand in the way of development out of what appears to be obscurant’s unreason.

Front 3

3. How is it that the boosters if self-fulfillment become the knockers of technology and vice versa?

Back 3

They have conflicting beliefs. The knockers seem to attack things like abortion because they believes that it is not like the old historic communities; but when they talk about politics they call for capitalism which seems to dissolve those old historic communities. The boosters are supports of an attentive, reverential stance in nature, who would risk there lives for it, but they think that a “woman’s body belongs exclusively to her” so it is ok.

Front 4

4. How does the contradiction play out with respect to, say, abortion and environmentalism?

Back 4

The cross-alignments include supporters of nature and self-fulfillment agree with abortion because they think that a “woman’s body belongs exclusively to her.”

Front 5

5. Why is the dominance of instrumental reason not just a matter of the force of a certain moral outlook?

Back 5

(Pg 97) “In many respects we find ourselves pushed to give it a large place in ourselves, as I mentioned at the beginning of this book.” The community around us is full of instrumental reason such as business procedure.

Front 6

6. What is the “Iron Cage”?

Back 6

(Pg 98-99) An “Iron Cage” (Thought up by Weber) is how society traps you with instrumental reason and modern technological advances. They do this by making it hard to restrict their sway in certain circumstances and by generating an outlook that takes them for granted as standards.

Front 7

7. Why does Taylor believe that the view of technological society as an “iron cage” is unsustainable?

Back 7

Taylor believes that the growth of technology is not going to stop anytime soon and that the “booster”/‘knocker” debate is not moving forward.

Front 8

8. Taylor believes that we are not “locked in”. Why?

Back 8

Taylor would argue the “iron cage” is something that can be overcome by authentic living.

Front 9

9. What are the three important moral contexts in which the stress on instrumental reason has arisen?

Back 9

(pg. 103-104)
*Environmental domination
*Disengaged moral reasoning
* “the affirmation of ordinary life”(104). Or in other words a greater emphasis on
science and technology to improve living conditions for the masses.

Front 10

10. Explain Taylor’s ethic of practical benevolence?

Back 10

Essentially practical benevolence is acting with other’s interests in mind. Taylor uses the example of technology being developed to feed hungry people and other uses which surpass aesthetic purposes.

Front 11

1. Why did classical Marxism and Leninism collapse?

Back 11

They failed because they didn’t make efficient or cost effective use of resources and labor.

Front 12

2. Why can there never be, according to Taylor, a definitive solution to the problems posed by market efficiency within the modern welfare state?

Back 12

(Pg 110-111) “In this regard our political situation resembles the cultural predicament I described earlier. The continuing cultural struggle between different outlooks, different enframings of the key ideals of modernity, parallels on the institutional level the conflicting demands of the different but contemporary ways we organize our common life: market efficiency may be dampened by collective provision through the welfare state; effective state planning may endanger individual rights; the joint operations of state and market may threaten democratic control” (111)

Front 13

3. What does Taylor mean by “fragmentation”? Why does it pose more of a danger for our society than does soft despotism?

Back 13

(112-113) By fragmentation, Taylor means that people are becoming less capable of forming a common purpose and to withhold it. Fragmentation becomes prevalent when people become increasingly atomistic; by this I mean that they share fewer common goals to their fellow citizens. Charles Taylor says that this is more dangerous than soft despotism because this will cause people to give up. People grow increasingly frustrated because the idea of a majority rule dissipates. If everyone were fragmented into their own societal “cliques,” then everyone has their own goals and no bill would get passed because of this.

Front 14

4. According to Taylor, why and how does fragmentation come about?

Back 14

(113) Fragmentation comes about when people, as a result of the atomistic individual mindset, have “a weakening of the bonds of sympathy, partly in a self-feeding way, through the failure of democratic initiative itself.” A great deal of political energy goes into enhancing the goals of the partial grouping, as opposed to debating on commonly understood programs and policies. Why fragmentation comes about is from individuals growing a more atomistic outlook on him/herself and are less connected to their fellow citizens.

Front 15

5. In this new fragmented situation, which two facets of political life take on greater and greater saliency?

Back 15

(114) The two greater facets of political life are judicial review and interest or advocacy politics. Judicial review takes on greater saliency in response to legislation becoming less and less on debating and compromising. The result is that matters “are seen as proper subjects for judicial decision in the light of the constitution.” Advocacy politics are similar to the first facet, but it includes “lobbying, mobilizing mass opinion, and selective intervention in election campaigns for or against targeted candidates” (115).

Front 16

6. How does one fight fragmentation?

Back 16

(Pg 118) There is no universal method of fighting fragmentation, it very much depends on the actual situation. Charles Taylor argues that common action can help fight fragmentation; he concludes this because he argues that since fragmentation is caused by a diminishing political identity and political powerlessness. If people were to take common action they would be distributing the political power that is currently held by a centralized government.

Front 17

7. According to Taylor, how has Canada been more fortunate than the United States with respect to the question of fragmentation?

Back 17

(Pg 119-120) Canada has a federal system as opposed to centralizing government of the United States. According to Charles Taylor, the provinces of Canada correspond with regional societies that its members identify with. In this sense, the population still has some power in what political action is to be taken as opposed to in the United States, where the government is growing centralized around its own self and disregards what the public desires.