Last Thoughts on <Emphasis Type="Italic">The Last Intellectuals</Emphasis>

Over twenty years ago my book The Last Intellectuals put into circulation the phrase “public intellectual.” The term unexpectedly enjoyed great success. It encapsulated a new division between a professional or academic intellectual focused on his or her specialty and an intellectual orientated to a larger public. The former tend to disappear into the university, while they latter write for the educated public. In the twenty years since its publication, my book has been sharply challenged. Moreover the emergence of African-American and women intellectuals, and well as new developments such as Internet, have possibly undermined my thesis. Yet these phenomena amount to revisions, not refutations, of my thesis. Moreover the role of intellectuals in France and Germany suggest that the same process of academization is taking place in other advanced industrial nations. What is called for is not nostalgia or its opposite, a celebration of everything that happens, but a consideration of the real shifts that affect the lives and work of intellectuals.

The Civic,Economic, and Political Consequences of Pentecostalism in Russia and Ukraine

In contemporary Russia and Ukraine, Pentecostalism carries with it commitments to civic engagement and democracy, strong bonds of social capital, and the embracing of an entrepreneurial spirit. In this article, the authors analyze the origins of Pentecostalism in Russia, Soviet methods of repression, and Pentecostal survival strategies. Continuing, the authors examine the political efficacy of Pentecostals, their civic commitments, their embracing of the free market, and the strength and nature of social capital among them. While the authors conclude that it is too soon to conclude that Pentecostalism will bring about democracy, civil society, and free markets in Russia and Ukraine, they argue that Pentecostalism is proving itself a popular choice in the contemporary religious marketplace and that choice is not without significant civic, economic, and political consequences.     

The Past as Prologue in Life Extension

Aging research may significantly lengthen human life spans in the foreseeable future. This paper argues that we do not need to wait until this happens to prepare for the dislocations that may result. Increased longevity over the past century has already raised urgent, unresolved issues of equity, social cohesion, and human dignity. These developments, and our past experiences in dealing with them, provide a basis for revisiting the basic questions raised by all attempts to extend human life: what does life mean, and why is it worth extending?     

Life Extension: Rolling the Technological Dice

The idea of radically extending average human life expectancy is an ancient one, but for most of human history exceedingly utopian. There is now, however, a revival of that idea, with some scientists and others arguing that it is possible and desirable. But the main problem with most of the life extension enthusiasm is that it is based almost entirely on the desire of some individuals to make it happen. The social consequences of success of such a venture are, however, either ignored altogether or dismissed on the grounds that any problems can be dealt with. In the end, none of our present human and social problems would be helped by radically longer lives and no obvious social benefits have been advanced to support it.

Relativism

Modern democracies increasingly confuse civic or political equality with a radical relativism that calls into question legitimate principles of hierarchy and the very idea of reasonable value judgments. This confusion reflects a “corruption,” in Montesquieu’s sense, of democracy rooted in a refusal to recognize distinctions that are integral to both human nature and social life. A moderate form of cultural relativism is a genuine intellectual achievement that helps combat ethnocentrism and allows one to better appreciate the full range of human experience. But criteria of meaning and truth are by no means entirely dependent upon cultural context. Our contemporary awareness of the “relativity” of cultures and historical experiences must be complemented by a robust appreciation of the universality of Reason and citizenship.

David Riesman and <Emphasis Type="Italic">The Lonely Crowd</Emphasis>

The reception of David Riesman’s classic sociological work The Lonely Crowd exemplifies both the possibilities and perils of the work of public intellectuals. The book was almost universally misread as a paean to inner-direction, and a lament upon the decline of the independent American spirit. But it was something rather more different, and more complex, than either of these things.