You're Here:
Home > Chapter 2 > Section 2.2
The more commonly known meaning of “idealism” is often thought to be practical or political. In this respect, it can either have a positive or negative meaning. In the positive context, it refers to the belief that ideals should be pursued. In the negative context, it is a way of viewing the world in its ideal state rather than acknowledging reality. When this meaning is used, practical realism is its opposite.
The first meaning doesn’t really say much about the existence of reality; it does relate to pursuing the betterment of society and is by many people associated with left-wing politics.
The second, more negative, meaning, however, does make a statement about reality by defining idealism as viewing the world in its ideal state rather than its real state. This, then, presupposes that there is such a thing as “reality” and the meaning of idealism in this respect thus is more connected to philosophical Idealism than the other practical definition.
According to the British Idealism Group at the Political Studies Association, the British Idealists’ political philosophy contains the practical application of the conceptual and normative systems they elaborate (52). The Idealists elaborated a relation between theory and practice in politics and philosophy. Also according to Vincent and Boucher, the British Idealists (except for Bradley, McTaggart and Oakeshott) thought that philosophy was integrally related to practical life and should be directed to improve the condition of society. (70)
The Idealists’ social and political beliefs can, in turn, be attributed to their philosophical Idealism. They for example emphasized the relation between society, the state, and the individual and also make clear the interdependence between these factors. This can be attributed to their attempts to come to a complex unity in the world (see sections 1.2 and 2.1).
Another practical implication of the Idealists’ political thought, was most Idealists’ liberal position. They emphasized left liberalism by the interdependence between society, the state and the individual. As a result, they opposed ideas that only took into account the interest of a narrow group. They further explained this by making clear the ultimate goal of a society (and each individual in it, as in their “real will” which is the “general will”) to reach the “common good” (see 1.2).
With regard to the pursuit of ideals, as in practical idealism, most Idealists were active in programmes to gain access to social services (notably university) for men and women of all classes. They for example pursued this in the University Settlement programme, which aimed to include poor people in “normal” society by having university people live and work together with them. Green also fought at his university to get access for women. Moreover, many Idealists were very active in politics and social work.
Still, however, I realize that this part of the British Idealist “philosophy” isn’t free of interpretation. By emphasizing the liberal position many Idealists took, for example, I overlook those that were conservatives – Oakeshott was, for example, and there’s speculation about Bradley’s political stance. I also have to interpret the social work of many Idealists as “idealistic”, which one may disagree with.
As for the more negative definition of idealism, it’s difficult to say in what way the British Idealist movement was related to it, and by concluding anything specific about this, I’d be more interpreting than offering true facts. Since, as I said, the Idealists either wanted to come to one (spiritual) thing to which reality could be reduced (absolute Idealism), or viewed that reality can only be perceived in the mind and so far doesn’t exist outside of perception, it is very difficult, if not impossible, to say whether the Idealists had an idealized view on the world. They did present idealistic ideas about how to arrange society, but, as later appeared, much of this was reachable. For example, women now have access to universities and poor people are more included than they used to be. Therefore, I may even say that the Idealists were very realistic in their practical views, working on real social problems of their time.
There are, therefore, many sides to the question of “excessively idealistic” views in the British Idealists, and the standpoint the Idealists themselves held about reality, complicates it even further – for this makes the answer to the question if reality even exists independent of mind uncertain. I think, therefore, that it largely depends on one’s interpretation of the British Idealist view and the position one has towards Idealism and left liberalism, whether one’d consider them to be excessively idealistic.