And our common sense, diluted through millions, obsessed by the
problems of manufacture and construction, is in ever greater danger
of losing that basis of character and enlightened reason that alone
can make common sense anything but common. It dreads ideas, distrusts
theories, is made uncomfortable by altruism that extends beyond the
home. As a nation, we have not degenerated, for our virile energy, our
will, our adaptiveness are all as strong as ever, stronger perhaps
than elsewhere in the world. But, as compared with Franklin’s, our
common sense has lost character. It pulled back in the great moral
and intellectual problems of the war; it did not lead. As manifested
in the present struggle over international policies, it falls below
the ethical standards of the nation, whether you tap it in clubs and
offices or in Congress. In a time of crisis it rallies to encounter
material problems and is invaluable; but morally and intellectually its
vision is short, its endurance weak.
The trouble with the American reformer, as has often been said, is that
he has more energy than reason; and this is because he incarnates the
instinctive, irrational will of which I have been writing. The trouble
with the American materialist is that he has kept his common sense
while losing his vision.
Both, in short, lack an adequate spiritual and moral basis; and so does
the American idealism that is functioning nobly, but so irregularly,
to-day. With an irresponsible will driving it forward and a
matter-of-fact common sense holding it back, it suffers too frequently
from the weakness of all qualities that spring from custom rather than
from conviction. Its leafage has spread; its roots have contracted.
I am not so unhumorous as to propose that the remedy is once again to
believe in Jonathan Edwards’s God and infant damnation; but we must
go deeper than habit and tradition for the springs of our action. Not
since the Civil War have we as a nation explored our souls, sought the
channels of our being, tested our ultimate faith. This war has been no
test. Its issues were clear. They appealed to principles that we held
firmly because we had inherited them. It was easier to go in than to
stay out. Even our material prosperity, apparently, stood to gain, not
to lose, by entering the conflict. We made the right choice, but it
was not hard to make it. To be idealistic was easy.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account