Philosopher views
Download 5.81 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- ON RELIGION
- HISTORY
THEORY OF MORALSIn Guiana, Hildreth wrote two of a projected six volumes: "Theory of Morals," 1844, and "Theory of Politics," 1853. In "Theory of Morals," Hildreth attempts to identify the source of morality and explain why different cultures have different moral codes. He argues in this book that moral distinctions grow out of the desire to help others and spare them pain. He thought the most important part of the book was his analysis of why people fail to act in accordance with the sentiment of benevolence. “While men are tormented with hunger, thirst, fatigues, bodily diseases . . . it is absurd to expect them to grow virtuous.” He concluded, “To make men better, we must begin by making them happier.” This was an important consideration, as it implies that personal happiness and the way you are treated can in turn effect the good that you may do for others. This is similar to the behaviorist mode of though in that a person will make good and bad choices base on how they have been rewarded for enacting those behaviors previously. It also creates another justification for helping others: not only is it what you are supposed to do, but it enables them to help the world they come in contact with. Hildreth considered "Theory of Morals" a technical work of philosophy, and a deeply religious undertaking. “My idea of God is, the Cause of . . . those distinctions which we call moral distinctions, and which may indeed in this sense be called the laws of God—just as the laws of chemistry may be called so.” He was accused of recklessness and atheism for locating the source of morality in “the constitution of man” rather than the word of God. Much like Divine Command Theory, Hildreth considered morals to be outside the realm of God. He may have provoked hostility by his harsh criticism of churches for preaching morality without working to relieve human suffering. However, his position was not anti-God no matter how it was misperceived, only critical of religious institutions in their inability to help humanity while all the while preaching that we should care for others. The review which most distressed Hildreth was by Francis Bowen, a conservative Unitarian who had taught philosophy and political economy at Harvard and had recently published his own philosophical treatise, "Critical Essays", 1842. In a series of articles and pamphlets, Bowen and Hildreth accused each other of atheism and immorality. “There are indeed among the Unitarians, two parties, the Channing party, and the Norton, or Cambridge party,” Hildreth wrote. “It is utterly impossible for a person gifted with the smallest power of thought . . . long to remain a Cambridge Unitarian. He must go backward, or go forward.” Hildreth was also deeply disappointed by Unitarians' lack of zeal for reform, particularly in the matter of slavery. Hildreth's view on morality necessitated action to right the wrongs that he saw in the world around him. He could not understand why others did not feel a similar sense of urgency, and so quickly grew disillusioned with some of his peers. ON RELIGIONAs a result of his father's experiences, Richard came to hate any hint of restriction on freedom of expression, especially in matters of religion. In 1834, the year his father lost his Gloucester pulpit, Richard wrote a pamphlet, Appeal to Common Sense and the Constitution on behalf of Unlimited Freedom of Discussion, defending Abner Kneeland against the charge of blasphemy. Later, he opposed as unbearable any attempt to set limits on acceptable Unitarian beliefs. He denounced conservative Unitarian Andrews Norton, who had insisted on his own right to hold unorthodox opinions, for condemning the Transcendentalists. Hildreth follows in the vain of philosopher/theologian/reforms like Martin Luther, who also found some of the church's policies lacking in morals and was harshly criticized for it to the point of being excommunicated from the church because of his reform minded attitude. “Free inquiry and ‘implicit faith’,” he wrote, “are two elements which cannot be reconciled.” Hildreth had fought against the restrictions on the freedom of slaves that he saw around him. Similarly, restrictions on the freedom of individuals to express their religious views frustrated him. He saw any such restrictions not only as against public interest, but also as immoral and unethical. Hildreth did not relish church attendance. He wrote, “A Sunday walk or a ride into the country, enlivened by the company of sympathizing friends, would inspire more of gratitude, more of love . . . and of desire to do good, than all the sermons that were ever preached.” Nevertheless, the depth of his emotional attachment to Unitarianism can be seen by how much he was hurt when Unitarians disappointed him. Hildreth's closest associates and co-workers in literary and abolitionist endeavors were all Unitarians. He worked for the antislavery cause with George Bradburn, Maria Weston Chapman, Caroline Weston, and John Pierpont. He greatly admired Theodore Parker's militant antislavery stance. He worked with Parker on legal challenges to the Fugitive Slave Law, and was part of the Unitarian literary community clustered around the Massachusetts Quarterly Review, edited by Parker. Hildreth was therefore not against religion, as he associated with religious individuals. HISTORYHildreth's major work was his six-volume “History of the United States of America,” 1849-1853. He was one of the first American historians to adopt the model of “scientific” history, attempting to present the past “exactly as it was” rather than as an enlightening story with a patriotic moral. Less popular in its day than the work of romantic historians such as George Bancroft, it was greatly respected by the next generation of historians. His reputation has declined during the late 20th century, however, with the rejection of the idea of “objective” history. Nevertheless, his modeling after scientific history was an important step forward from the time. Although it can be argued that objective history does not exist, Hildreth at least attempted to provide some objectivity. The popular writers before him had made no pretenses about revising history to send the messages they felt were desirable. Hildreth's ability to attempt to avoid that problem made him ahead of his time. Most now believe, as Francis Bowen said in his 1851 review, that “it is impossible to write history without seeking, either avowedly or stealthily, or unawares, to verify some hypothesis, or establish some theory, which furnishes a reason and guide for the selection and arrangement of materials.” Bowen claimed that Hildreth used his history to express his dislike for the established church in Massachusetts. However, Theodore Parker praised it for setting forth “the good and evil qualities of the settlers of the United States, with the same coolness and impartiality.” A century later, the Oxford Companion to American History, 1966, described it as “notable for its accuracy and candor, and its acute insights into the relationship between politics and economics.” The model that Hildreth set for historian/activist/philosophers would be modeled in recent years, most notably by Howard Zinn. However unlike Hildreth, Zinn believed that it was impossible to prevent an "objective" history, so instead focused on providing a history from the perspective of the oppressed. However like Hildreth, Zinn is a big believer on activism and working to change society as well as the idea that one should act moral so other people will in turn act morally later. His writing in the field of history won Hildreth enough respect to make him a candidate for the professorship of history at Harvard in 1849. He was passed over in favor of his old antagonist, Francis Bowen. He applied again when Bowen resigned in 1851, but his never ending attacks against the "Cambridge party" precluded any real chance for his appointment. After completing "the History," Hildreth turned to various forms of "literary drudgery" to earn money for his family, only to lose most of it in the financial crisis of 1857. He returned to full-time journalism as a writer and editor for Horace Greeley's New York Tribune, an influential opponent of slavery and voice of the emerging Republican Party. In his last years, plagued by illness, discouragement, poverty, and deafness, Richard Hildreth at last reached an audience interested in what he had to say. By 1860, Hildreth was too ill to work. Hoping that a warmer climate would help, Caroline enlisted the aid of Senator Charles Sumner and the governor of Massachusetts to get her husband appointed to the largely honorary position of consul to Trieste. Hildreth's friend William Dean Howells, visiting him in Italy, described him as “a phantom of himself, but with a scholarly serenity and dignity amidst the ruin.” Richard Hildreth died in Florence in July, 1865, and was buried in the Protestant cemetery, near the grave of Theodore Parker. Caroline remained in Italy, where she had long wanted to travel and study art. She died of cholera in Naples in 1867. Directory: uploads uploads -> 587 Return function, r i(X) r i(0) r i(1) r i(2) r i(3) 1 0 2 4 6 Thermal Station, I 2 0 1 5 6 3 0 3 5 6 10 uploads -> Department of science and humanities department of mathematics part-a questions and answers uploads -> The Case Against the nypd’s Quota-Driven ‘Broken Windows’ Policing What Is It? uploads -> For want of a nail uploads -> Ownership Models There are two different types of ownership models uploads -> Police Militarization uploads -> City of rising star regular meting thursday, july 14, 2016 uploads -> Township of winfield uploads -> Stop Militarizing Law Enforcement Act of 2014 uploads -> The Black Panther Party’s Ten-Point Program What We Want Now! Download 5.81 Mb. Share with your friends:
|