Former students of McKeon have praised him and proved influential in their own right, including novelist
Robert Coover, authors
Susan Sontag and
Paul Goodman, theologian
John Cobb, philosophers
Richard Rorty and
Eugene Gendlin, classicist and philosopher Kenneth A. Telford, sociologist and social theorist
Donald N. Levine, anthropologist
Paul Rabinow, literary theorist
Wayne Booth, and poets
Tom Mandel and Arnold Klein. He was also father to the literary critic Michael McKeon. Richard McKeon and the Committee on the Analysis of Ideas and Study of Methods appear under thin disguise in
Robert M. Pirsig's Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.
Philosophy and pluralism McKeon published 158 articles over the span of seven decades. The evidence of his pluralist influence is not evident in one particular doctrine or system, but rather in a plurality of all his articles. The scope of his work extends to virtually all philosophies and to the whole cultural history of the Western world while being ordered by semantic schema. Early in his academic career, McKeon recognized that truth has no single expression. His understanding of philosophical and historical semantics led him to value philosophies quite different from his own. He viewed the aim of pluralism as not achieving a monolithic identity but rather a diversity of opinion along with mutual tolerance. He characterized his philosophy as a philosophy of culture, but it is also humanistic, a philosophy of
communications and the arts, and a philosophical rhetoric. The value of a philosophic position is determined by demonstrating its value as an explanation or as an instrument of
discovery. The pragmatism of
Richard Rorty owes much to McKeon, his teacher. McKeon's operational method is a method of
debate which allows one to refine their positions, and in turn, determining what limits their
perception of an opponent's argument.
Opposition provides a necessary
perspective. Notwithstanding, it does not necessarily acquire characteristics from the perspectives with which it is opposed; his philosophy, by
nature, resists being pinned down by a single name. It is not meant to affirm the
value or
credibility of any and all
philosophies. Essentially, pluralism is closely related to
objectivity; a desired outcome of
communication and
discussion and a fundamental goal and principle of being
human.
Human beings come together around common issues and/or problems and their different interests and perspectives are often an obstacle to collective action. McKeon's pluralism insists that we understand what a person means by what they say. He believes that proper discussion can lead to agreement, courses of action, and in some cases to mutual understanding, if not, an eventual agreement on issues of ideology or
philosophic belief. The work of
Jürgen Habermas has close affinities to that of McKeon. Conflicting concepts, interests, and assumptions which concern society form an
ecology of culture. Discussion forms an object, which is the transformation of the subject into a product that is held in common as the outcome. McKeon's philosophy is similar to rhetoric as conceived by
Aristotle, whereby it has the power to be employed in any given situation as the available means of persuasion. The pluralism of perspectives is an essential component to our existence. Nonetheless, the effort to form our individual perspectives through thought and
action brings us into touch with being human and being with other individuals. For McKeon, an understanding of pluralism gives us access to whatever may be grasped of being itself.
The New Rhetoric In the later stages of McKeon's academic career, he started giving more attention to world problems (see
UNESCO). He sought to improve individual
disciplines as he felt that they were meant to improve mankind. Refurbishing rhetoric was necessary, he argued, because outlining the needs for, antecedents of, tasks imposed upon, and general character and affiliations of rhetoric would both solve problems and
communicate solutions for
people everywhere. As our
age produces new
data and
experiences, we require a new, expanded rhetoric which takes into account
technology. The modern world has progressed quite far but it has not yet found a
logos which is able to make sense of
techne (
technology =
techne +
logos). The sciences alone cannot hope to be productive without reincorporating rhetoric otherwise they would only be
analytic. For McKeon a new rhetoric is the only means of bridging the gap between arts and sciences. Incorporating rhetoric may permit the further development of new fields of arts and sciences. Rhetoric is able to
navigate among the various kinds of arts and sciences providing an opportunity to interrelate them and set new ends which makes use of both spheres. The new rhetoric can order all the other arts and sciences resulting in new discoveries. Mckeon deemed a very forceful rhetorical strategy capable of avoiding relativism as with a very forceful rhetorical strategy a solidarity is gained as people are supposedly unified via a forceful rhetoric. Relativism is avoided according to McKeon via the force of a rhetorical strategy rather than via access to a Platonic realm. McKeon borrows traditional
rhetorical terms (see
Aristotle and
Quintilian) to outline the principles of the new rhetoric (
creativity/
invention;
fact/
judgment;
sequence/
consequence;
objectivity/
intersubjectivity) and then leads them toward brighter avenues of
discovery by enlarging
Aristotle's traditional
rhetorical categories (
epideictic,
judicial,
deliberative) and reintegrating philosophical
dialectic. He believes that the materials for doing this are
topoi and
schemata. The new rhetoric must be
universal,
objective, reformulate the structure and program of verbal rhetoric and its subjects, and its applications must be focused on the particular now. For McKeon the now is to be 'mined' to contribute to the future resolution of an important problematic. Here again the impact of McKeon on Richard Rorty is evident. Along with John Dewey, McKeon (as Rorty does) deemed philosophy to be basically a problem-solving endeavor. Basically there are two sorts of solidarity sought by those who employ a rhetorical strategy: the solidarity of those who have a goal and the solidarity of those who have 'values'. In other words, solidarity can be sought by those who have no 'values' but rather a rhetoric or by those who have no goal but rather 'values'. New
data may cause new problems for rhetoric, but it will still continue to produce categories and attempt to find new kinds of
topoi which will produce new
classifications and create new
interdisciplinary fields. Rhetoric helps to figure out how to create these fields, or how to decide which existing fields are appropriate for various data. The new rhetoric will find new kinds of ends, by putting
technology in the service of ends in
collaboration with other arts rather than allowing
technology to lead us to restricted and potentially harmful ends. Whatever 'values' are deemed to lead to the solution of a problem are rhetorically deemed worthy. The problematic is all for McKeon, and rhetoric is supposed to contribute to the solution of the problematic. Clearly rhetoric is unable to come up with a clear plan for a solution, rhetoric being rhetoric. Rather via rhetoric, 'values' are enunciated which are supposed to eventually gain the goal. One who employs rhetoric to gain a goal is basically attempting via brute force to gain an end. Assuming a goal is gained, a corollary of rhetoric is that those who had the end as an end now abandon the end, eschew the end as a 'value', and now develop new goals and new rhetorics. This is getting way ahead of the game, though, given the track record of rhetoric. Rhetoric has been repeatedly tried down the centuries and has repeatedly been associated with disaster though this is irrelevant for those attempting a rhetoric, as rhetoric is deemed to achieve goals by brute force by those who practice rhetoric, but rhetoric has also failed to achieve ends. Those who have espoused a rhetoric
have achieved valued though precarious positions. The work of Richard McKeon shows that, despite multiple, great failures, even up to the 20th century, rhetoric following Aristotle continued to 'put a spell over people'. ==Cultural influence==