ABSTRACT
I There is a simplified polemical response to the case “against theory” which goes roughly as follows. We are all of us doing theory all the time, whether we like it or not. Mostly we get along happily enough without needing to spell out the kind of theory we are working with, or the kinds of justification we might produce if challenged. Still there is this tacit theoretical dimension to everything we do, from the politics of everyday behavior to the business of interpreting literary texts. Those who deny this argument on commonsense or pragmatist grounds are usually (as J.M.Keynes once remarked) in the grip of a bad old theory which has left them blind to their own ruling prejudices and assumptions. So the issue is not, as the anti-theorists would have it, a choice between just getting on with the job or allowing oneself to be distracted by unreal problems. What it comes down to is the question whether or not one is prepared to think at all beyond the limits imposed by received commonsense wisdom. Taking a stand “against theory”—as if such a thing were really possible-is tantamount to rejecting Socrates’ claim that the unexamined life is not worth living.
