This seminar is devoted to the contemporary crisis of Truth and Democracy
Liberal democracy can only survive if people agree about what it means to tell the Truth and live within the Truth. Once upon a time, defenders of this proposition engaged in reasoned debates over how one could discern the truth and then sought to arrive at a consensus on Truthtelling and Truthliving. On this basis, equal and free-thinking individuals could make intelligent decisions about how best to live together and nurture a just society.
Unfortunately, our commitment Truthtelling and Truthliving has been undermined. Truth is up for grabs. People’s feelings and their exaggerated sense of self-importance have become more precious to them than the acceptance of elementary facts. For this reason, it is no wonder that democratic values and institutions are in crisis. Politicians of all political persuasions–both on the left and on the right–act as though gaining power is more important than serving the public good. They and other powerholders—cable talk-show hosts, craven megacorporations, social media pundits, and clinically narsissistic technological entrepreneurs—have become masters of Untruthtelling. Amidst our ongoing pandemic of Untruth, it is no surprise that citizens no longer trust the democratic system and are susceptible to manipulation by conspiracy theorists, predatory disinformationmakers, and petty demagogues.
Over the course of this seminar, we will explore numerous aspects of the troubled relationship between Truth and Politics in our difficult times. As you will see, I have a uniquely all-embracing conception of these twin concepts. My perspective is based on the idea that Truthtelling and Truthliving are essential components of a good society. I believe that politicians and other powerholders are obliged to seek, speak, and act upon the whole truth. By democratic politics, I mean the noble activity in which free and equal citizens collaborate in pursuit of a common good. I am convinced that there is no better system for facilitating this activity than Liberal Democracy. Yet, Liberal Democracy is in peril. We must fight for the Truth if we want to save it!
An Opportunity and a Challenge
Because our seminar comes at an unprecedented time in modern history, we are presented with both an opportunity and a challenge.
The Opportunity: The immediacy of the flagrant abuse of democratic institutions throughout the world, the increasing frequency of political violence, the rise of extremist movements in previously stable democracies have world-historical significance. Yet, ironically, they present us with an “epistemic opportunity” to reflect upon the human condition in ways that have been unavailable to generations of Notre Dame students since the Vietnam War and World War II.
Our challenge: We meet at an historical juncture at which America is deeply divided and polarized. There is blame to go around on all sides, especially among Republicans and Democrats. Thus, it is important to me that we try to look beyond our fleeting partisan loyalties and perspectives. As you will see, I have designed this entire seminar to encourage you to disagree about major political issues. I relish disagreement about politics.
My challenge. As someone who has dedicated his life to education, I must deal with a particular aspect of this challenge. As I hope you will see, it is not my aim in this course to convert you to one or another partisan agenda. It would be irresponsible for me to even try. And even if I did try, I would be unlikely to succeed. However, it would be equally irresponsible for me as an educator to treat factual and scientifically-verifiable claims as matters of belief or opinion. Whether you or I like them or not, these claims are based on scholars’ honest efforts to come as close as they can to the truth. This doesn’t mean that they will ever reach a point of absolutely certainty. This would be impossible. There is always room for error. Rather, their goal is to reach the broadest possible consensus about what is true–and then, to encourage others to prove the consensus wrong.
For example, the existence of an overwhelming consensus among climatologists about the existence, causes, and threat of global climate change is a fact. Most students at Notre Dame seem to accept this consensus.
Similarly, there is, as yet, no significant evidence that the 2020 Presidential election was fraudulent. If the evidence existed, it would have been recognized by 60+ courts and conceivably led to the decertification of state election results. See former Atty Gen. William Barr’s statement here. See Sen. Mitch McConnell’s statement about the threat that democracy will enter a “death spiral” here. Despite multiple recounts in many states, millions of Americans still believe the election was fraudulent. Okay. All they need to do is to marshal evidence to disprove the consensus. In this case, the courts, Republican politicians like Barr and McConnell, and all of the experts whom I know in American politics would be wrong. It would be both unscientific and undemocratic to deny the evidence. But first, the doubters must prove they are right. This point applies to the 2022 mid-terms as well. See here and here. Anecdotes are not enough!
My approach is also novel. I have an ideal conception of truth that transcends scientific and political facts. I believe there is a moral component to all aspects of Truthtelling. I do not accept the idea that we can live in an “anything goes” world. I affirm that there are certain ways in which we are morally obliged to live with others. Above all, I seek to abide by the maxim that we must at all times treat all humans as having intrinsic human dignity.
In short, I will do my best to speak the truth. If you think I’m wrong, then I hope you will do your best to prove me wrong. I have been wrong many times, and I have no problem with being proven wrong again.
Seminar Structure
Your privileged time at Notre Dame is quickly slipping away. When we first meet, you will have less than three semesters left! The gnashing of teeth will soon commence. Thus, I have deliberately designed this seminar to challenge you to ask big questions and to reflect on the significance of the substantive courses in political science and other fields that you have already taken. I am also very interested in challenging you to think about more important matters than the study of mere politics.
This seminar is divided into four sections. In the first, I will lay the foundations for our investigation by inviting you to reflect on what some great political thinkers have had to say about Truth and Politics. Although many of these writers are long dead–Machiavelli, Kant, Mill, Madison, Dewey–I will seek to persuade you that their approaches to truth provide useful tools for understanding all of the current debates over Truthtelling and Truthliving. Concurrently, we will read a book by the courageous journalist, Maria Ressa, who is very much alive. In the second section, we will examine multiple manifestations of the contemporary crisis over Truthtelling in political life. In the third, we will consider what can be done to resuscitatte the pursuit of Truth and restore the good health of our democracy. Finally, we will conclude our seminar by asking why each of us must endeavor to “live within the truth.” If politics is not personal, I don’t believe it is worth studying. To this end, we will reflect upon a conception of truth that cannot be judged according to the scientific method: absolute truth.
Our topics and discussions will evolve with the ebb and flow of political circumstances. The advantage of a web-based syllabus, the format I use for all of my courses, is that I can modify it as we move along. On the importance of this syllabus, WATCH this instructive video. This is a reading, writing, and speaking-intensive seminar. Therefore, it is essential that you keep up with all of the syllabus’s topics and assignments.
Please go to the Requirements page now to familiarize yourself with my expectations.
A Personal Reflection: The Privilege of Being at Notre Dame
All Notre Dame students should seek to live within the truth. When you arrived at Notre Dame several years ago, you immediately became members of the Ruling Class. Even before then, you had already won the Ovarian Lottery (Warren Buffett). Your good fortune comes with obligations.
To get a perspective on your good fortune, read this essay by an ND graduate, Class of ’60: Sean Sullivan, “My Notre Dame Wasn’t Your Notre Dame” HERE
Sullivan gives new meaning to that eternal question: “Would you go to jail to attend Notre Dame?”
Moreover, you are studying at a Catholic university that is committed to pursuing the ultimate Truth. Notre Damed is not limited to the narrow conception of truth that is characteristic of secular universities. Hence, we are in a prime position to engage in the business of Truthseeking, Truthtelling, and Truthliving. To paraphrase an eighteenth century writer whom we will encounter soon, Dare to Act Truthfully!
These obligations apply to professors as well. I am fortunate to teach at Notre Dame. My life could have easily taken a different turn. Every time I teach a class, I look for new ways to shed light on this manifold conception of truthtelling.
***
Advisory
Please leave your technology at home. This advisory includes electronic devices of any kind, such as laptops, Kindles, IPads, IPhones, video cameras, video games, FBI trap-and-trace devices, iris scans, Meta’s avatars, and other digital technology. I will make one exception to this rule. You may use tablets, but only if you use them for taking notes.
My class is a no-‘X,’ no-Musk zone. Some behavior is just not dignified!