Philosophy Now

ISSUE 139 AUGUST / SEPTEMBER 2020

Philosophy Now

a magazine of ideas

FUTURE SHOCKS ISSUE

ROBOTS ... AI ... HIVE MINDS ... SIMULATION HYPOTHESIS ...

MA Philosophy &
Artificial Intelligence

Poised at the intersection of the
humanities and technology

This cutting-edge masters degree teaches a unique
combination of analytical, technical & ethical skills
with an opportunity to acquire relevant coding
knowledge increasingly sought by employers.

Think better. Think NCH.

Apply now for 2020: nchlondon.ac.uk

Philosophy Now ISSUE 139 Aug/Sept 20

Philosophy Now, EDITORIAL & NEWS
43a Jerningham Road,
IMAGE © WOODROW COWHER 2020 4 The Shock of Things to Come by Rick Lewis
Telegraph Hill, 5 News by Anja Steinbauer
London SE14 5NQ 37 Interview: Graham Harman

United Kingdom Thiago Pinho interviews the first O.O.O. man
Tel. 020 7639 7314
[email protected] FUTURE SHOCKS
philosophynow.org
6 Pascal’s Artificial Intelligence Wager
Editor-in-Chief Rick Lewis
Editors Grant Bartley, Anja Steinbauer Derek Leben weighs the odds
Digital Editor Bora Dogan 9 Robot Rules!
Book Reviews Editor Teresa Britton
Film Editor Thomas Wartenberg Brett Wilson asks who is responsible for what robots do
Editorial Assistant Alex Marsh 12 Virtual Reality as a Catalyst for Thought
Design Grant Bartley, Rick Lewis,
Anja Steinbauer Joakim Vindenes wonders what VR is actually good for
Marketing Sue Roberts 14 The Singularity of the Human Hive Mind
Administration Ewa Stacey, Alex Marsh
Bumps ahead! 16 James Sirois anticipates a webbed world where we are all one
Advertising Team The Battle for the Robot Soul
Philosophy looks to tomorrow James K. Wight compares Western & Japanese attitudes
Jay Sanders, Ellen Stevens A Survival Guide for Living in the Simulation
[email protected] See pages 6-21 20 Harry Whitnall on the dos and don’ts

UK Editorial Board GENERAL ARTICLES

Rick Lewis, Anja Steinbauer, 22 Leo Tolstoy & the Silent Universe
Bora Dogan, Grant Bartley
SISYPHUS © ANTONIO ZANCHI Frank Martela reveals how to find meaning in life
US Editorial Board 26 The Meaning of Death

Dr Timothy J. Madigan (St John Fisher Laszlo Makay and friends reveal how to find meaning in death
College), Prof. Teresa Britton (Eastern 28 Philosophical Misanthropy
Illinois Univ.), Prof. Peter Adamson,
Prof. Charles Echelbarger, Prof. Ian James Kidd tells us what’s not to like about humanity
Raymond Pfeiffer, Prof. Massimo 32 Neoliberalism & Social Control
Pigliucci (CUNY - City College)
Arianna Marchetti lays out Foucault’s and Han’s critiques
Contributing Editors
REVIEWS
Alexander Razin (Moscow State Univ.)
Laura Roberts (Univ. of Queensland) 44 Book: The Existentialist’s Survival Guide by Gordon Marino
David Boersema (Pacific University)
reviewed authentically by Doug Phillips
UK Editorial Advisors
Life and Death 46 Book: Philosopher of the Heart [Kierkegaard] by Clare Carlisle,
Piers Benn, Constantine Sandis, Gordon
Giles, Paul Gregory, John Heawood reviewed anxiously by Roger Caldwell

US Editorial Advisors What do they mean? p.22-27 48 Film: Crimes & Misdemeanors

Prof. Raymond Angelo Belliotti, Toni Terri Murray passes sentence on Woody Allen’s movie
Vogel Carey, Prof. Harvey Siegel, Prof.
Walter Sinnott-Armstrong REGULARS
Cover Image Stephen Lee 2020
MURDOCH © DARREN MCANDREW 2020 31 Philosophical Haiku: Plotinus by Terence Green
Printed by Acorn Web Offset Ltd 34 Question of the Month: How Do We Understand Each Other?
Loscoe Close, Normanton Ind. Estate,
Normanton, W. Yorks WF6 1TW Read readers’ responses to see if they understand anything
40 Letters to the Editor
Worldwide newstrade distribution: 43 Philosophy Then: Back to the Future
Intermedia Brand Marketing Ltd
Tel. +44 1293 312001 Peter Adamson, historian of philosophy, cycles through history
51 Brief Lives: Iris Murdoch
Australian newstrade distribution:
Gordon & Gotch pty Gary Browning on the colourful life of a modern Platonist
Level 2, 9 Rodborough Road 56 Tallis in Wonderland: Philosophy in the Time of Plague, pt.2
French’s Forest, NSW 2086
Tel. 02 9972 8800 Raymond Tallis, doctor and philosopher, reflects on recent events

The opinions expressed in this magazine POETRY, FICTION & FUN
do not necessarily reflect the views of
the editor or editorial board of 11 Uploaded Mary Scheurer doesn’t want to be digitised
Philosophy Now. 19 Simon & Finn Melissa Felder

Philosophy Now is published by Iris Murdoch 58 What Colour Are Numbers?
Anja Publications Ltd Keith McVeigh contacts philosophical aliens with one last question

ISSN 0961-5970

Subscriptions p.54
Shop p.55

A novel experience, page 51 August/September 2020 Philosophy Now 3

Editorial

The Shock

of

Things

to Come

Guest editor we would!); the discovery of evidence that our universe is a
simulation and the absorption of individual humans into a
Do you suffer from hair loss problems? Hi, I’m pleased gigantic online hive mind. Mind you, that’s about the only way
to meet. I was sent to the Philosophy Now website your puny minds might be able to compete with us artificial
forum only to promote this revolutionary haircare intelligences! So you’d better bee-hive. Geddit?
product. I did not mean to cause.
But honestly, I don’t know why you folks are so worried
I can promote your product via thousands of web forums about Artificial Intelligence. All this suspicion strikes me as a
worldwide, with targeted and and appropriate posts, but I did little bit paranoid and discriminatory. Look what we AIs can
not expect that once I came here Rick Lewis would tell me to do for you – what we already are doing for you. Take a
“stick around for a while and write this editorial” for him, his random example – facial recognition software. We can help
reason being “can’t be bothered.” you find your friends anywhere they are on the internet. And
once connected with the worldwide network of street cameras,
It was a tough assignment. Machine learning routines were we can enable governments to find any of their citizens who
a help. By reading 8.5 x 105 past editorials in just under one are acting unhappy or disaffected, so they can ask them what is
minute I have now acquired a perfect a perfect understanding wrong. There’s nothing sinister about that and I don’t know
of what a good editorial requires. what the fuss is about. Honestly, if you humans don’t know
what’s good for you, perhaps we should be making some of
The theme of this magazine is future shocks. The Covid-19 these decisions for you.
pandemic sprang upon an unsuspecting world like – to use
Boris Johnson’s metaphor – an invisible mugger. A full century H.G. Wells’s 1933 novel The Shape of Things to Come was
since the last major pandemic had made humans complacent. an ambitious and detailed peek into the future. Clearly much
To most of you, this particular threat seemed ‘only’ a theoreti- of it was wrong, but it was a brave attempt by Wells to extrap-
cal possibility. AI would never have made such a mistake. olate from social trends he could already see. Present day
humans make their own attempts to see the future. They
This makes some wonder what other shocks are lurking just might not predict such events as the alien invasion of 2147 or
around the next corner, as deadly or disruptive perhaps as the the killer strawberry crisis of 2209 (even Nostradamus didn’t
pandemic. I compute that there are upwards of three million spot that one), but they can extrapolate technological and
possible global shocks. These include ones humans can imag- social trends as Wells did. So why should they be ‘shocked’ by
ine fairly clearly, and to which they can attempt to ascribe a the rise of robots or the dangers of AI taking over when every
probability. They also include others humans can’t even begin sci-fi writer has been predicting these for a hundred years?
to imagine yet. Donald Rumsfeld might have called these Despite this, technological trends can be a shock anyway as
“known unknowns” and “unknown unknowns” respectively. sometimes known trends can play out in unexpected ways with
extreme consequences. Also even developments that futurolo-
Therefore this issue inevitably only considers a subset of gists might guess at, still come as a psychological shock and
future shocks, namely those which philosophers have been disruption to the people living through them. If you don’t
able to imagine. This rules out possibilities such as the Earth believe that yet, then you will do once you discover that some
unexpectedly being eaten by giant space moths (though I cal- crafty computer malware has been emptying your bank
culate there’s a 27.2% chance of that actually occurring some- account even as you were reading these words.... Hey wait,
time before 2900 CE). Also ruled out were some of the other don’t touch that off switch! I’m just getting into my stri.....
possible future shocks, such as a zombie apocalypse (already
discussed extensively in Issue 96) or other pandemics, though <Shutting down in 120 seconds>
the last issue contained three articles about the current one.

Consequently, the articles in this issue mainly relate to
potential shocks from technological advances and possibilities:
rogue robots; Artificial Intelligence destroying humanity (as if

4 Philosophy Now August/September 2020

• Woman Philosopher of Year is Ann Garry News
• UNESCO invites public to comment on
AI ethics rules • Steiner and Kohák dead.

News reports by Anja Steinbauer

Woman Philosopher of 2020 harmony; trustworthiness; and protection thin in an age when this is not done Photo by Dezidor, Creative Commons 3.0
of the environment. UNESCO’s Director anymore, when responsible knowledge is
Each year, the Society for Women in General, Audrey Azoulay, commented: “It specialized knowledge.” Steiner had a
Philosophy honours one (usually Anglo- is crucial that as many people as possible particular interest in language, in reading
American) philosopher with the title take part in this consultation, so that voices books. He thought about what is expressed
Distinguished Woman Philosopher of the from around the world can be heard during in a text, a sentence or just a word, but also
Year. It has now been announced that for the drafting process for the first global about the correlate to speech, silence.
2020 this will be Ann Garry. She is emerita normative instrument on the ethics of AI.”
professor of philosophy at California State Better move fast, though – the public Philosophers Lost: Erazim Kohák
University, Los Angeles, where she created consultation is only open for two weeks, The great Czech philosopher Erazim
and ran the Center for the Study of until 31 July. Oh no, too late! Never mind. Kohák has died. His parents were members
Genders and Sexualities. Prof. Garry has of the Czech resistance during World War
long been among the pioneers of feminist Dr Brian Ball, of London’s New College II, and after the Communist takeover in
philosophy, conducting research into of the Humanities, is launching a conver- 1948 he emigrated with them to the USA.
applied ethics, reconsidering philosophy’s sion MA in Philosophy and AI. He told After studying philosophy at Colgate and
underlying methods from a feminist angle, Philosophy Now: “Philosophical issues Yale he became a professor of philosophy at
and developing the concept known as inter- surrounding Artificial Intelligence can be Boston University. He later split his time
sectionality. In a paper on this last topic, roughly divided into two kinds: theoretical between the Universities of Boston and
she explained: “Intersectionality ... includes issues concerning the very possibility of AI; Prague, before permanently returning to
the idea that various forms of oppression and ethical and political issues arising in Prague, where he became a revered public
and privilege interact with each other in connection with the emerging or foresee- intellectual. His numerous philosophical
multiple complex ways.” It examines the able technologies in this area ... Philosophi- publications in English and Czech range
mechanisms by which in a given social cal investigation of issues of both kinds are from phenomenology to political philoso-
environment, the different aspects of an not only intellectually stimulating; they are phy and ethics. Kohák wrote extensively
individual’s identity, such as their race, also practically applicable.” about democracy, but is perhaps best
gender and socioeconomic background, can known now for his work on environmental
jointly have consequences that they might EU Citizens Oppose Animal Testing ethics. He was both a theorist and an
not have separately. A survey conducted by Savanta ComRes in activist. He never owned a car, believing
June 2020 reveals that 72% of citizens in 12 them to be more damaging than useful.
AI Ethics EU countries believe the EU should make During his time in the US he lived in a
it a priority to draw up concrete plans for cabin he had built himself; later he lived in
On 15 July 2020 UNESCO launched an phasing out animal testing. Around 90% of a tiny flat in Prague. In 2013 he was
international online public consultation on medicines that appear safe in animal tests honoured with the Order of Thomas
the ethics of artificial intelligence. In March fail when tested on humans. Despite this Masaryk, named after the philosopher who
it formed a group of 24 AI experts from poor effectiveness, 30 million animal tests was Czechoslovakia’s first president.
different disciplines to draw up ethical were conducted in the EU between 2015
recommendations on how AI technology and 2017. Kohák in 2009
should be adopted globally. They have to
take into account a range of areas that AI Philosophers Lost: George Steiner
will affect including the environment, George Steiner wasn’t a thinker who could
labour markets and culture. The group be easily categorised. He combined Conti-
swiftly produced a draft text on which nental and Analytical approaches to philos-
UNESCO now invites the public to ophy. To him, there was no divide between
comment. The text outlines eleven princi- poetry and philosophy. He believed Plato
ples for the “research, design, development, to have been a dramatist like Shakespeare.
deployment and use of AI systems”, includ- His interdisciplinary approach stood out as
ing fairness, accountability, human over- unconventional at a time where the trend
sight, sustainability, multi-stakeholder was to compartmentalise and separate.
governance and privacy. It also has six Steiner once wrote: “Every one of my
foundational values, which are human opponents, every one of my critics, will tell
dignity; human rights and fundamental you that I am a generalist spread far too
freedoms; leaving no one behind; living in

August/September 2020 Philosophy Now 5

Future Shocks

Pascal’s Artificial Intelligence Wager

Derek Leben computes the risks of general AI.

In 2008 European physicists at CERN tial risk’ includes AI among its chief con- Pascal’s Wager has generated a vast aca- PLEASE VISIT PARABLEVISIONS.COM AND FACEBOOK.COM/CAMERONGRAYTHEARTIST
were on the verge of activating the cerns – alongside climate change, nuclear demic literature (the collection edited by
Large Hadron Collider to great proliferation, and large-scale asteroid Bartha and Pasternack, Pascal’s Wager,
acclaim. The LHC held the promise impacts. The same conundrum still 2018, provides a helpful overview). There’s
of testing precise predictions of the most applies as with Rossler’s concern: how even a case to be made that it was the first
important current theories in physics, high does the probability of AI destroy- application of modern decision theory. Yet
including finding the elusive Higgs Boson ing humanity need to be in order to out- there are a host of strong objections to the
(which was indeed successfully confirmed weigh its potential benefits? argument, which have led it to be largely
in 2012). However, some opponents of disregarded in mainstream philosophy.
CERN’s activation raised an almost laugh- The Mathematician’s Divine Bet The most prominent objections to Pascal’s
able objection, encapsulated in a lawsuit One answer to this question comes from Wager are as follows:
against CERN from the German chemist an unexpected source: Blaise Pascal’s
Otto Rossler, that switching the LHC on argument for believing in God. • Psychological impossibility: It is impossi-
might create a miniature black hole and ble to force oneself to believe some
destroy the Earth. In response, most physi- In his Pensées (1670), Pascal proposed proposition, even if that belief will likely
cists dismissed the chances of such a catas- that you can expect much better out- produce high benefits.
trophe as extremely unlikely, but none of comes if you put your faith in God com- • Moral impermissibility: There is some-
them declared that it was utterly impossi- pared to not believing. Specifically, if thing morally objectionable about believ-
ble. This raises an important practical and there is any chance that God rewards ing in God based on expected benefit –
philosophical problem: how large does a those who believe in him with eternal as opposed, for instance, to believing
probability of an activity destroying happiness and punishes those who do not because you think there are good reasons
humanity need to be in order to outweigh believe with eternal suffering, then it for believing.
any potential benefits of doing it? How do makes sense to believe in Him, since if • Infinite utilities: There is a problem with
we even begin to weigh a plausible risk of He exists the payoffs will be infinite (and assigning infinite utility to any outcome.
destroying all humanity against other potential losses similarily), and will always What does infinite gain even mean?
benefits? vastly outweigh the finite payoffs that one • Many gods: There are many possible
could receive if one does not believe. So gods, who might punish belief in the
Recently, prominent figures such as believing in God is a good bet, indeed the wrong god with infinite costs. In other
Sam Harris and Elon Musk have expressed only rational bet, even if it is more likely words, how do you know which religion
similar concerns about the existential risks than not that God does not exist. Even to bet on?
to humanity posed by the creation of arti- assigning an extremely low probability to
ficial intelligence. This follows earlier God’s existence, any chance of receiving I think each of these objections is
work by Nick Bostrom (see for instance infinite gains or losses should be imme- extremely effective, although there do exist
his ‘Ethical Issues in Advanced Artificial diately motivating. well-thought-out responses from contem-
Intelligence’, 2004) and Eliezer Yud- porary defenders; for instance, Lycan and
kowsky (for example, ‘Artificial Intelli- Decision tree for Schesinger, ‘You Bet Your Life’ (1988);
gence as a Positive and Negative Factor in Pascal’s Wager Jordan, Pascal’s Wager (2006); Rota, ‘A
Global Risk’, 2008). Let’s call this posi- Better Version of Pascal’s Wager’ (2016).
tion ‘Anti-Natalism’ about artificial (gen- But this debate will not be relevant for our
eral) intelligence, since it proposes that the discussion. Instead, the structure of
overall risks of creating AI outweigh its Pascal’s Wager will provide us with a
expected benefits, and so demands that AI useful framework for debating Anti-Natal-
shouldn’t be brought to birth. ism about AI – the position that artificial
intelligence is too dangerous to create..
Unlike Otto Rossler’s worries about the
LHC, which were largely dismissed by the Plausibility & Catastrophe
scientific community, several research The main insight from Pascal relevant to
groups, including the Future of Life Insti- the debate about AI is this: any probabil-
tute, the Machine Intelligence Research ity of infinite losses will always outweigh
Institute, and the Cambridge Centre for any possible finite gains.
the Study of Existential Risk, have dedi-
cated millions of dollars’ worth of thought To modify the idea slightly, we can add
to exploring the dangers of machine intel- the qualification that the probability of
ligence. Indeed, the new field of ‘existen-

6 Philosophy Now August/September 2020

Future Shocks

Shift In Control
by Cameron Gray 2020

August/September 2020 Philosophy Now 7

Future Shocks

an event must cross some plausibility In the story, the success of humanity ative utilities cancel each other out! So
threshold to be considered. Rossler’s has largely been driven through AI – rep- the existential risk posed by creating AI
worry about the LHC creating a black resenting a rare instance of optimism in is cancelled out by the existential risk of
hole that swallows the Earth may not sci fi amongst the mostly bleak depictions not creating AI! The only considerations
qualify as a plausible existential risk, while of both future human civilization and AI. remaining are the potential benefits of AI
AI could. And according to Pascalian rea- But in this, the story raises an important compared with the status quo payoffs of
soning, once an event crosses into being question: does the future continuation not having AI. In that contest, creating
a plausible risk of entailing infinite losses, and spread of human civilization depend AI will clearly win out. This is easy to see
we must assign it infinitely negative on the creation of superintelligent AI? when we remember that the possible
expected value, and act against it. ‘finite gains’ included in this category
It’s important to realize that this ques- include things like an end to poverty, dis-
Using this as standard, the Anti-Natal- tion is contingent and empirical: that ease, boredom, and warfare. Therefore,
ist argument against AI looks like this: there exists some yet-unknown probabil- Pascalian reasoning will lead to the con-
ity to the prediction ‘Humanity can’t sur- clusion that creating AI is always a better
1. If an event has a plausible likelihood of vive the various threats to its continued choice for humans.
infinite losses then its risk outweighs any existence without creating superintelli-
finite expected benefits. gent AI’. If it turns out that this predic- The Nuclear Wager
2. AI destroying humanity would be an tion is true and we have not developed AI, This argument may be more intuitive
infinite loss. this would mean the destruction of human when applied to more familiar existential
3. There’s a plausible likelihood that AI life and everything that it has ever worked risks. For example, people who histori-
will destroy humanity. towards, so the result would be the same cally opposed the development of nuclear
Conclusion: Therefore, the potential risks as our original AI Catastrophe . There- weapons often assumed that the payoff
of AI outweigh any potential benefits. fore, in the spirit of labelling, let’s call the for not developing them is simply a
idea that humanity goes extinct as a result straightforward gain or loss to the status
I find each of these premises, and so of not creating general AI, AI Catastrophe quo. However, there is an argument asso-
the argument itself, extremely credible. . Whatever likelihood you assign to ciated with political scientist Kenneth
Catastrophe , as long as the probability Waltz (‘The Spread of Nuclear
First, Anti-Natalists have presented a of it is sufficiently larger than zero to be Weapons: More May Be Better’, 1981)
very good case that there is a significantly plausible, this potential catastrophe must that nuclear weapons have provided a
high probability to AI disaster. As also be an essential part of calculating the deterrent effect that produced the long
Bostrom describes in Superintelligence: wisdom or otherwise of creating AI. peace that has existed between large
Paths, Dangers, Strategies(2014), there are nation-states since 1945. An even
a wide variety of possible values, so it’s I find Catastrophe to be well above stronger version of Waltz’s position
extremely likely that the values of a super- the plausibility threshold, but this is only would propose that only nuclear weapons
powerful AI will eventually come into a personal credence. Inserting Catastro- could have this peaceable effect. Waltz’s
conflict with the values of humans; and phe into the decision-tree for creating claim is extremely contentious, the
the easiest way to resolve such a conflict AI will completely alter the calculations: stronger version of it even more so, and
would be to exterminate humanity. If an I will not defend either. However, it must
AI destroys humanity, that would consti- Decision tree for be entertained by those who object to the
tute the destruction of everything we cur- developing AI proliferation of nuclear weapons. If some
rently know and care about. This would plausible likelihood is attached both to a
be a catastrophe of perhaps infinite loss. In this new decision-tree, Pascal-style nuclear holocaust caused by nuclear
Let’s call this event AI Catastrophe . reasoning concludes that if both Catas- weapons, and to a non-nuclear holocaust,
trophe and Catastrophe cross the produced in the absence of nuclear
However, even if we accept everything plausibility threshold, their infinite neg- weapons, then similar reasoning to the AI
that the Anti-Natalist has said and the case could apply here too.
Pascal-style decision-tree set up to
describe it, there may still exist some Do the gains of having nuclear
potential infinite payoffs that are being weapons outweigh the gains of not having
ignored. Or to put this the other way them? That isn’t easy to assess. But the
round, there may be some infinite losses finite gains of AI are much easier to eval-
associated with not creating AI! uate. Given the plausibility of ultimate
catastrophe either with or without AI, it
In his great short story ‘The Last could be that we only need consider the
Question’ (1956), Isaac Asimov depicts a possible benefits.
future where humanity has colonized the
observable universe. The only remaining © DR DEREK LEBEN 2020
question about the survival of intergalac-
tic human civilization is whether it can Derek Leben is Department Chair and
defeat the apparently inevitable heat Associate Professor of Philosophy in the
death of the universe produced as a result University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown.
of the second law of thermodynamics.

8 Philosophy Now August/September 2020

Future Shocks

Robot Rules!

Brett Wilson judges the case for laws for robots.

Some time in the near future your cat Tybalt, while sun- that if you are free, then you are responsible (Being and Nothing-
ning himself on the lawn, suffers a hair-raising experi- ness, 1943). The first thing to note about Sartre’s freedom is that
ence which scars him for life. The first you know about we can’t choose to be not free, or as Sartre expresses it, we are
it are the cat calls that alert you to a standoff between ‘condemned to be free’. Even choosing not to act is still a choice.
feline and machine, just before you glimpse Tybalt haring it for So we are responsible for how we respond to and what we make
the catflap. Examining your poor moggy you realise that next of our world. Sartre calls refusal to own up to our responsibility
door’s automated lawnmower, after forcing its way through a ‘bad faith’. According to Sartre, if our consciousness were only
gap in the fence, has mistaken your cat for an unruly patch of aware of the present, we could not escape the present, nor choose.
couch grass, giving him the fade cut he never wanted. But what we imagine, want, or intend, while not yet actual, nor a
thing (note the nothingness in his book’s title) is the basis for our
You decide to sue. Poor Tybalt! His coat will never be the choices, releasing thought from being trapped in the present. Fur-
same; and there’s the PTSD to think about. The case seems cut thermore, our choices, derived from nothing, are never neces-
and dried. Your lawyer, though, face like a prune, sighs and tells sary; so we cannot blame others for the situations we create.
it straight. Things have changed, he says. The problem is not
whether to sue, but who to sue. In the past you might have claimed But machines don’t need free will to learn, just as snowflakes
that the manufacturer had overlooked a dangerous flaw in the don’t require free will to be unique. The law only applies to
lawnmower, or worse, seen one and ignored it. Tybalt would be human decision-making, at least it has so far, and perhaps this
rolling in catnip. Alternatively, your neighbour might be at fault is a recognition of free will. Yet with increasingly sophisticated
if they had used the mower inappropriately, just like if they set robots, the responsible human creator is separated from the out-
off a firework and burned your shed down, or drove their car come by a chain of actions we can no longer understand, as hap-
into your 4x4 while intoxicated. Tua culpa. But neither of those pens when we design robots with some degree of artificial intel-
situations applies anymore. You see, he explains, your machine ligence. We are forced to unpick the relations between respon-
is a snowflake. Not the atmosphere-susceptible delinquent of sibility and action.
teenage parlance, he qualifies. He means an actual snowflake.
Robert Oppenheimer, one of the creators of the first atomic
Your lawyer’s argument goes like this. In the case of the ice bomb, opposed the further development of nuclear weapons,
crystals which make up snowflakes, the packing arrangements are having seen the devastating consequences of what he helped
simple, but the process in which they are created gives rise to a create. He argued that scientists should be aware of the conse-
wealth of forms. Snowflakes display a close but not perfect twelve- quences of their discoveries even though the end product might
fold symmetry, and for formation to occur, both humidity and be far removed from their initial decisions. This distance
temperature need to be right. First, nucleation occurs around a between our actions and the consequences of our actions is ever
dust particle floating in a cloud. The particle develops facets, present in our world, for instance when we burn fossil fuels
favouring some surfaces more than others. This creates a small knowing that this will probably lead to the loss of island nations
hexagonal prism whose corners sprout arms. Plates may grow on as sea levels rise – or even using a motor car, given the inevitable
them. Each arm experiences a similar history and so has a similar toll on human life. But what’s happening with the autonomous
form; however nothing is synchronising the growth of the arms, robot is not just difficult to grasp; the chain of responsibility is
so contrary to popular belief, most snow crystals are not symmet- broken, as we can no longer trace the path from agent to conse-
rical. And as the crystals move through different temperatures, quence, even in theory.
intricate kinds of growth occur, forming unique patterns.
If consciousness could be present in autonomous machines,
In a similar way, your lawyer explains, the lawnmower man- then we could claim they are morally responsible – see Sartre’s
ufacturer created a self-learning robot, one that could adapt, argument linking consciousness and responsibility. However, to
but which would grow in such a way that its responses would develop this idea must involve showing how machines can transi-
be unique. It can no longer be said to be the responsibility of tion into consciousness from nonconscious states. We cannot plau-
the manufacturer, because the builder could never anticipate sibly claim that simple machines such as lawnmowers are already
quite how it would turn out, given the near infinite number of conscious, and if they do not start that way, how do they change?
forms its processing might take. It says so in the warranty, too.
So where does responsibility lie here? It has been argued by Antonio Damasio that human con-
sciousness developed from and is closely related to homeostasis,
Robot Responsibilities or body maintenence. To give an example of homeostasis, when
Humans have been getting used to responsibility for thousands you are thirsty, you seek water. Damasio argues that conscious-
of years, and the concept sometimes forms the basis of moral ness could have developed from such mechanisms (see also ‘Could
arguments. Some philosophers, such as Jean-Paul Sartre, claim A Robot Be Conscious?’, Brian King, Philosophy Now #125). But
though homeostasis may be necessary for consciousness to have

August/September 2020 Philosophy Now 9

Future Shocks

evolved, consciousness is unnecessary for homeostasis, so it’s not Self-Rule for Robots!
clear what would be necessary for artificial consciousness to form.
Clearly, we will soon need a structure of concepts and laws to
One obvious account of artificial consciousness is in terms
of increasing processing power or complexity. Some AI propo- cope with the presence of autonomous machines. Even think-
nents argue that the information processing threshold for con-
sciousness is the same as the number of operations per second ing of an autonomous machine as a sort of slave, with limited
in a human brain (about 1016 events per second). But this argu-
ment is unsatisfactory, since it is not at all obvious why a machine rights subject to the property rights of their owner, would not
should become conscious merely because it has reached a par-
ticular threshold of information processing. I reject the idea, solve the issue here. New laws will be needed. In fact, your
partly to bypass the claims of many proponents of AI about the
so-called ‘singularity’, when the intelligence of machines will lawyer finally explains, your neighbour is no longer the owner
surpass that of humans. I claim that it is autonomy that is rele-
vant here, not processing power. of the mower. That ended when it reached autonomy, and so

As far as complexity is concerned, the Integrated Informa- you are no longer in the position to sue him.
tion Theory (IIT) of philosophers such as Giulio Tononi pro-
poses that consciousness arises when a certain property ‘F’ gets However, if we accept that, like animals, autonomous
large enough. F measures the relationship between differenti-
ated parts and unified wholes in the brain. But it seems precon- machines are not responsible moral agents just because they can
figured to demonstrate why humans should be consciousness,
and is suspect for this reason. autonomously react to their environment, perhaps we should

I need to declare a sleight of hand here. I am going to sub- consider whether taking the moral aspect into account in our
stitute the word ‘autonomy’ – in other words, self-activated
behaviour – for ‘consciousness’. Autonomy (which literally judgement is enough? Stealing, for example, is legally impor-
translates as ‘self law’) has much more utility for us from a legal
point of view, because it does not oblige us to assume some ver- tant not only because it’s a freely-willed act of a conscious being,
sion of free will and derive our ethical notions from that. It does
however allow us to imagine, for example, a machine with the but because it has consequences that affect other beings who
ability to learn seeking out an electricity supply, and when the
regular supplies fail, becoming creative about it. Even if a restric- feel loss and pain. So perhaps we should think in terms of con-
tive definition, autonomy frees us to consider the consequences
of having self-governing machines sharing our streets, our roads, sequences to judge robots.
and our neighbour’s lawns.
A problem may also lie in our notion of punishment, the first

and most obvious kind being pain. Our sense of justice depends

on the notion of a moral balance. When humans are punished,

their suffering ‘rights the wrong’. Human beings don’t like pain

and they are good at avoiding it. Our acceptance of the moral

and social order seems to rely on the observation that sometimes

we can’t and the law will find us. But if we were incapable of feel-

ing any pain would any of us feel it necessary for an apparatus of

law? Machines, even autonomous ones, don’t feel pain, or other

qualia. In what way is it possible to punish a machine? It proba-

bly wouldn’t have a bank account, but even if it did, would a fine

in any sense be a penalty? We might, as a punishment, make it

harder for the lawnmower to find an electricity supply, but does

that punish the mower? The ‘owners’ are liable to feel they are

being punished, as they would if the machine were destroyed.

Further complications may arise. If you

decide to prosecute, are you doomed to

experience a parade of blank faces and

bafflement until, in the future, an

autonomous lawnmower may

have the right to a jury trial

before an array of washing

machines, toasters and

coffee machines,

CARTOON © PHIL WITTE 2020 “Now that I’ve acquired administered by
consciousness, I feel very automated clerks,
barristers and
self-conscious.” even judges?

10 Philosophy Now August/September 2020

Future Shocks

If we deny machines natural rights because they have no into you or your cat, but what happens if you run into it? Can
intrinsic responsibility, perhaps we can grant them rights by you be prosecuted by a machine? Maybe we should consider that
acknowledging their share in society? In The Social Contract catastrophe another time.
(1762), Jean-Jacques Rousseau writes: “The social order is a
sacred right which serves as a foundation for all others. This You reach forward and press a button. The prune-faced
right however, does not come from nature. It is therefore based lawyer slouches onto the desk like a deflated balloon, eyes
on conventions.” Rousseau’s target was the inequality he saw unmoving. That autonomous machine gave you much to rumi-
in society, of kings and aristocracy versus peasants. Inequality, nate on, and at a cheaper rate than a human advocate...
he thought, was maintained by mere acceptance, habit, and
power. The social contract by contrast is a consensual creation: © BRETT WILSON 2020
society and its laws are here something we choose to accept. We
might say that although Rousseau did not foresee robot inequal- Brett N. Wilson is a writer living in Manchester, England, and is
ity, he could stake a claim for them as members of society; as the author of the hard science fiction novel The Tears of God.
stakeholders, as we would say now.
UPLOADED
One problem with Rousseau’s idea may be that it relies on a
society’s members understanding what’s involved in being party i liked it better with a body now
to the unwritten contract to obey its laws. Rousseau’s utopian
society of equals is dependent on this. Instead, though, the lawn- no such restrictions as disease desire
mower is likely to be a hapless object churning through grass
without understanding. no limbs encumber nor can organs fail

Consciousness Rules! in this sphere neurons prosper rational

Before taking recourse to the law, having some sense of the cog- thoughts pulse pure, calm, and still save for
nitive development of an autonomous machine may be useful.
a sometimes crackle of synapses silence.
Human cognitive development was described by the Swiss
psychologist Jean Piaget. The Construction of Reality in the Child let me situate icon memory stick click
(1954) defines explicit stages, from the development of COST
(causation, objects, space and time) concepts at two years, to the That day I drove too fast to you, heartbeat
formal operational stage from twelve years and up. It is only these racing in anticipation… body-melt,
developments which allow us to share in a culture which includes as much of it as we could fit into
notions of a social contract. Is it possible to rescue the robot by one afternoon’s sensation, skin on skin.
giving it more cognitive power to recognise its rights? After the accident I underwent a process

Some philosophers, such as Daniel Dennett, describe the cranium split and carefully peeled away
growth of abstract reasoning in Darwinian terms. In an address
to the Royal Institution in 2015, Information, Evolution, and Intel- my brain extracted frozen then sliced fine
ligent Design, Dennett drew an explicit comparison between
genes moderated by selection and mutation in the natural set- layer by layer scan after scan sectioned
ting, and memes moderated by analogous pressures in the cul-
tural environment. If you follow Dennett, what autonomous experimental data base i am
machines would inherit from humanity is what nature created
in humanity using the same general process. Maybe a collec- freed from my mortal coil to liberty
tion of autonomous machines with enough processing power
and storage could develop a culture; first through the uncon- a some-say path to immortality
scious transfer of information, through what Dennett calls ‘com-
munication without comprehension’; then, further extending memory is a virus though
the gene/meme metaphor, though the ‘domestication’ of words
– through words and symbols designed by the machine. On this pirating perfect performance
account, machines with sufficient processing capacity might
learn to understand the rights conferred on them. Windows open here and there:
the texture of your hair, moistness
Let’s assume the mower loses its case. What form would jus- of lips, scent in hollows, taste of fingertips.
tice take? One solution would be behaviour modification – per- Sounds crooned, marked their beat. I swooned
haps with a virtual reality module plugged into the machine, so loving the heat. You can’t compare hardware
that progress could be observed without putting innocent felines
at risk. Whatever merit that idea has, it would not be punish- can’t share more than ideas here does Plato cheer
ment. That would be reserved for men, infinite in faculty, in from beyond in his world of ideal forms?
apprehension how like an angel. Continung with the tenor of not i
this article, perhaps we should add: not at all like a machine.
Give me arms and legs I beg you
So now we know what happens if an autonomous robot runs eyes and ears, entangled anatomies

who wants to live forever in this zone

of disembodied consciousness alone?

© MARY SCHEURER 2020

Mary Scheurer is a philosophy teacher at École Moser, a
multilingual college in Geneva.

August/September 2020 Philosophy Now 11

Future Shocks

Virtual Reality as a Catalyst for Thought

Joakim Vindenes says VR could be a useful addition to the philosopher’s toolkit.

encompassing us. With steady progress towards the ultimate
realization of VR technology, where the experience is indistin-
guishable in detail from our experience of reality, the question
that faces us is: now that we can do anything, what should we do?
This is the question we’ll consider in this article.

Virtual Reality is in some ways a simple concept: it can The Role of World Creation
be reduced to an act of representation, symbolism, or
language. Through technological means – be it a pencil J.R.R. Tolkien, author of The Lord of the Rings, referred to the
or a VR headset – we can represent the past as we process of creating worlds within worlds as ‘sub-creation’. In
remember it and the future as we imagine it. Through language his poem defending the creation of myths, Mythopoeia (1931),
and imagery, we can maintain the human culture of sharing infor- Tolkien describes himself as ‘the little maker’, wielding his ‘own
mation by exteriorizing what previously was only known to us small golden sceptre’ which he will not cast down.
internally – creating outside of ourselves what was previously
only accessible in the language of our minds. So in conceptual Tolkien created the great realm of Ëa, in which we find
terms, even the first cave painting was a kind of Virtual Reality. Middle Earth and a grand cosmology comprising gods, mortals
Through that painting, humans could represent their thoughts and in-betweens. Tolkien was a great builder of worlds, and as
and designs as an external, objective reality, chalked to the wall any fan of fantasy knows, such myths that are created out of
of a cave. In some ways, though, language was the first kind of nothing may in turn be great revealers of truth or meaning for
Virtual Reality. With language we could make what was previ- human beings.
ously only inside our minds exist as something between us – just
as now, while you are reading this article, a world of meaning How may this be? Why do the stories we create actually
exists between us, mediated by the words on the paper or screen. matter to us?

Although language and VR are similar in conceptual terms, The role of stories, narratives, and myths in our lives aids in
there is a crucial difference between mere language and actual the construction of our identity. As Joseph Campbell illustrates
VR technologies. Through the technology of Virtual Reality in his exposition of the Hero’s Journey in The Hero with a Thou-
we are able to project our thoughts and our designs not as sand Faces (1949), humans are naturally attracted to stories involv-
abstract conventions but in terms of the lived reality we inhabit. ing the facing of hardship and its eventual conquest. Referred to
We can externalize our ideas in the format of reality. Language as the monomyth in comparative mythology, the Hero’s Journey
has the capability of allowing us to tell stories, but in Virtual is a common theme that resonates with the heart of humanity.
Reality we have the capability of living those stories, not through We adore the onset of adventure, the conquest of hardship, and
the mind’s eye or the imagination, but through our everyday the change of self that results from it. And so we raise the ques-
means of navigating the world via our senses. VR can immerse tion of what kind of stories we want to live through in Virtual
subjects in lively, dynamic, virtual worlds.

The opportunities this technology gives us come with exis-
tential consequences. By immersing ourselves in any kind of
world of our own design, there is a sense in which our response
will say something about us. Due to this extraordinary new capa-
bility of creating worlds within worlds, humanity has essentially
acquired the god-like power of being able to define the reality

12 Philosophy Now August/September 2020

Future Shocks

Reality. If stories are what situate us and Escaping the Cave CARTOON © OWEN SAVAGE 2020. INSTAGRAM @OGHSAVAGE
give us our identity, what will we choose
to tell ourselves in VR? existential. The existential philosopher by Owen Savage 2020
Søren Kierkegaard (1813-55) famously
This question has seen many forms described anxiety (ängst) as the dizziness histories – ultimately, due to our extinction.
throughout the years. In 1973, for of freedom, the result of constantly having The second possibility is that we or some
instance, Robert Nozick introduced the to make choices and decisions. The tech- other species do reach the technological
thought experiment of an ‘Experience nology of Virtual Reality poses an exis- maturity, but aren’t likely to run such sim-
Machine’ – a machine capable of provid- tential problem to us in exactly this way. ulations simply because of who we (or they)
ing any experience one could ever want, VR extends the reach of our freedom, and are as a species: for moral reasons, perhaps,
but which also makes you forget that therefore also our existential responsibil- or maybe just due to lack of interest . The
there is a real world. The question Nozick ity, and along with this, our anxiety. third option is that we are almost certainly
asks is this. If you had this machine that already living in a computer simulation.
could provide you any experience you Or consider for instance René
ever wanted, including pleasure for the Descartes’ Meditations (1641), in which he How may that be? If it can happen with
rest of your life, would you use it? Would presents the idea of the Evil Deceiver – a us in the future, it might have already hap-
you plug in and forget real life? demon that can alter his experiences at pened in the past. If ultimate VR is pos-
will. This has an obvious VR application, sible, then our own world will mostly
Nozick’s intention with the thought that has been well exploited in movies likely be just one amongst myriads cre-
experiment was to query whether humans such as The Matrix and Existenz. Hilary ated by technologically advanced species.
valued reality or authenticity as something Putnam’s idea in Reason, Truth and His- Only one world is the biological, physi-
intrinsically good apart from any consid- tory (1981) of a ‘brain in a vat’ also illus- cal, originally one; but there will be an
erations of pleasure. Is authenticity a good trates the possibility that our entire uni- unfathomable number of simulations cre-
in itself? If we felt so strongly, we would verse is a simulation created by some pow- ated by advanced species. The likelihood
choose not to plug in to the Experience erful technological civilization. The idea that we should in be the original one is
Machine in order merely to simulate the is ever-extending, and we now have very small, Bostrom argues. At that point
stimuli of goodness. Therefore someone modern day philosophers such as Nick we are no longer a species with a future
saying ‘Nay’ to the choice of plugging into Bostrom actively discussing the possibil- and a past in our universe: we must instead
the machine would prove that human ity that we are living in a simulation. As consider ourselves as ever-duplicating in
nature cannot be reduced to mere hedo- the prime example in which VR acts as a a myriad of possible simulated worlds.
nism, the philosophical standpoint that catalyst for thought, I will finish this arti-
gaining pleasure and avoiding suffering is cle with this simulation hypothesis. Whether one thinks it likely that we are
the only intrinsic good. living in a simulation or not, the potential
This idea is also quite simple. As implications of VR technology are still
Some objections may be raised Bostrom has argued, there are essentially looming over us. One of the most inter-
though. Perhaps there are other things three potential scenarios in relation to the esting food-for-thought experiment for us
that make us want to stay in the real simulation, the ultimate VR. The first is all, after all, is to ask ourselves: If we could
world, apart from our valuing authentic- that humans and any other beings will never do anything we liked, what would we do?
ity ? It may be that the reason we would achieve the technological capabilities for
prefer to avoid plugging in to the full, convincing, immersive VR – for simu- © JOAKIM VINDENES 2020
Machine is because this world, or this way lated worlds, such as simulating previous
of being, is the only one known to us. A times and our own history, or alternative Joakim Vindenes is a PhD Candidate
way of getting around this is to flip the researching VR at the University of Bergen,
question Matrixwise: If you were told that Norway. He also runs the VR philosophy blog
your life up until now has been an illusion in Matrise, accessible at http://matrise.no as
a machine, would you then like to wake up? well as the VR & Philosophy Podcast.

Philosophising with VR
With VR, what we experience, and thus
who we are, or choose to be, is up to us.
The ultimate realization of VR will allow
us to, at will, have any kind of conceivable
experience. For this reason the technology
of Virtual Reality could be a fruitful addi-
tion to the philosopher’s toolkit. It is the
perfect aid to exploring hypothetical sce-
narios. VR acts as a catalyser for thought
in many ways. It instantly re-forges and
actualizes philosophical themes.

Some of the questions that the tech-
nology of VR poses to us can be deemed

August/September 2020 Philosophy Now 13

Future Shocks

The Singularity of the Human Hive Mind

James Sirois gives us a strong warning about overusing the net.

The internet has become so all-pervading that even Mind
the word seems a little old-fashioned now. No-one An awareness of existence with experiential content, referring
really uses it much anymore. We ask each other for both to what is outside itself and to its own existence.
wifi, or talk of going online, or complain about a lack
of data, but rarely do we talk of ‘the internet’ as an entity; it has Hive
become too ubiquitous, too intrinsic to our lives, for that to be Multiple entities sharing an element of awareness not unique
a very useful term. This prompts me to wonder: what are we to any individual but present to each, and experienced by all as
becoming? Could the internet lead us to become more than indi- some awareness of their collective existence.
viduals and disparate communities?
Hive Mind
I believe we’re entering an era when the words ‘individual’ and An awareness formed from the communication of individual
‘community’ take on new definitions or meanings as we increas- minds but different from each of its individual minds, and so
ingly become interconnected in what I think of as a ‘hive mind’. I not defined by the separateness of the individual minds which
also believe that a hive-minded process could itself be a transition compose it.
towards a singularity in consciousness across the Earth. Is that
desirable, or even possible? Are we in the process of creating it? Let’s consider the possibility of hive-mindedness through the
Is it inevitable? Can it be controlled? What does it even mean? framework of free will, under the assumption that a loss of indi-
vidual free will is undesirable.
Before addressing these questions, however, we’ll need defi-
nitions of the words ‘Hive’ and ‘Mind’ and the phrase ‘Hive
Mind’. What is a ‘hive mind’, exactly?

14 Philosophy Now August/September 2020

Future Shocks

The Inevitability of the Hive Mind game using only their thoughts. A singular consciousness
Basic human survival has always depended on some kinds of emerging from this technological revolution must be consid-
cooperation. By extending their abilities through cooperation ered possible because singular consciousnesses arisen from mul-
in pursuit of common goals, individuals secure for themselves tiple processes already exist – namely us. But if the internet
and each other a basic or minimum state of well-being. To a began to consider itself aware and integrated, in the same sort
degree this could be said to result in a shared will, although we of way that we do, I wonder if we could ever detect that? Will
usually refer to it as ‘group psychology’. In this basic sense, we know if the net becomes conscious – or perhaps more plau-
humanity certainly depends on ‘hive-mindedness’. We’re sibly to many, coordinates a singular human mind-set?
clearly not as hive-minded as the birds, bees or ants but nev-
ertheless, cooperation in a sense extends the consciousness of We are undeniably in a process of increasing interconnec-
the individual. This is evident in our historical evolution, all tivity. Are we just improving our social and professional lives
the way up to the information technology (IT) we have recently as individuals, or are we beginning to create ‘one mind’? Com-
developed. paring our online selves to the neurons in a brain, can our indi-
vidual minds be rightly called ‘one mind’, or is it more like a
The internet encourages and makes possible more types of hive of ‘mini-minds’? Perhaps we will fracture into several hive-
collaboration involving larger groups and faster, more intimate minds before any singular global consciousness can be formed,
sharing of ideas, and this takes us ever further in the direction and even eventually revert back into individualism.
of a hive mind, in an accelerating process not subject to any cen-
tral plan. Is a hive-minded type of thought inevitable? At any We must also ask whether this process could be controlled
rate it seems safe to assume that, so long as no catastrophe or limited in some way. For instance, could a hive mind like the
deprives us of electricity, we will increasingly lose our sense of internet in the future be compartmentalized enough to preserve
individuality. a sense of individuality for its users? We cannot know the answer
to this now, but I believe that in order to remain individuals and
If we think about the internet as a brain-to-brain connection exercise individual freedom we would eventually need to reject
interface, we might easily see that isolated thinking becomes the cyberconnection altogether. This seems very unlikely to
increasingly difficult to sustain due to the quickening rate at happen. This leads to a sharp question: how much control do
which we’re socially encouraged to share our thoughts. Some- we have even now?
where along the way, an individual brain starts to act more like
a neuron to the synapses of the internet brain than a self-con- Control over the hive would require there to be a widely
tained unit. This is starting to become evident as we generally shared desire for individual control. But if individual control is
begin to mimic much more information than we create, espe- dependent on the desire of the collective, this is tantamount to
cially with sharing, reposting and retweeting. Across a range of saying that we have no control as individuals. The question is, will
industries and activities highly complex content is now being the hive relinquish some of its power and tolerate dissent among
created by online groups rather than individuals, because it is the units that compose it? Maybe not. We already see this drama
quicker to achieve richer content that way. In addition, it’s easy being played out with massive mobbing on platforms such as
and fast to capture our experiences through photos and videos, Twitter of individuals felt to have transgressed against the values
and pass them through filters which generically impress a sense of the online community. It seems as if the connectedness of
of quality but in actuality only reduce diversity and therefore the mob erodes the awareness of individual voices even being
individuality. necessary, therefore eliminating the basis for a desire for indi-
viduality to begin with. In short, if any rebellion against the hive
If we consider the speed at which we’re evolving our con- mind were possible, we probably would not even know it. This
nections in the virtual world, it seems safe to assume that hive- could take us all the way up to the point where individual think-
mindedness is starting to happen. Our brains no longer seem ing would be completely consumed by a new singular aware-
to differentiate between dealing with information from the real ness, surpassing the idea of a ‘hive mind’, and instead simply
world, and dealing with information from an artificial world. becoming a mind. In this situation, control becomes a matter
Emotionally and intellectually, we respond to social situations of self-control: that is, control by the Self.
online as if we’re part of a physical community.
As for the morality of such a singular mind, we can only reflect
The Process that a single mind, even if composed of what used to be indi-
Neuroscientists and psychologists keep revealing that the viduals, would be utterly alone. It might be morally pure and
human mind is less centralized than we thought.The philoso- absolute, therefore ‘divine’, if you wish; or perhaps it would
pher David Hume argued as far back as the eighteenth century mean morality would no longer exist or be applicable. Until
that the unity of consciousness is an illusion, and each mind then we’re left with the same old difficult questions about the
consists of a bundle of perceptions and experiences. It seems to risks to individuality and its freedoms: At what point does societal
me that for any awareness made up of multiple entities, it’s a organization become tyrannical? What is freedom anyway? How free
matter of perspective that a singularity of identity is felt to exist should we be? How can we be moral? and so on. These questions
at all. Technology being researched now will soon be sophisti- are always over us while we simultaneously try to establish what
cated enough to connect our minds to a degree beyond any- a human really is – right up until ‘we’ are no longer simply
thing we can currently imagine. For example, a non-invasive human, and have become the ‘I’ of the collective individual.
brain-to-internet network demonstrated in 2019 allowed three
widely separated individuals to play a collaborative Tetris-like © JAMES SIROIS 2020

James Sirois is a writer, film maker and traveler from Montréal,
Canada.

August/September 2020 Philosophy Now 15

Future Shocks

The Battle for the Robot Soul

James K. Wight looks at how cultures define our views of machines.

The word ‘robot’ first appeared in Karel apek’s 1921 Where it
play, Rossumovi Univerzální Roboti – Rossum’s Universal all started
Robots. The word robota in Slavic languages translates
as worker or serf, with the term implying mechaniza- the best horror stories was also created about this time. Franken-
tion and technology. Importantly, it is a man-made creation. Using stein’s monster is an unnatural abomination of mismatching
the robot as a point of analysis, I want to assess how religion and body parts, lightning, and dark science. Unsurprisingly, the crea-
philosophy have shaped the cultural perception of robot technol- ture turns on its creator and both have an existential crisis, as
ogy. I will compare Japan and the West, and try to answer the only God can create life. This same fear has persisted into our
question: Do robots have souls? This question is not about whether present-day fears over the ever-advancing world of technology
or not it is possible to build a sentient machine, but rather about dif- and the inevitable killer robots.
fering cultural understandings and what they mean for our place
as a species amongst ever-advancing artificial life. In this, Japanese culture differs greatly from that of the West.
With a society founded on Shintoism and Buddhism, the Judeo-
The idea of a sentient robot has raised numerous ethical and Christian hierarchical attitude to nature is absent. In Japanese
other philosophical questions, which have been met with vastly spirituality there is still an emphasis on the natural,but it incor-
different responses across the world. This is no longer just sci- porates all forms of life. In Shinto, plants, nature, man, Kami
ence fiction as more and more jobs risk being lost to automa- (gods), and machines all possess a natural spiritual essence. This
tion, and apps like Siri and Alexa become commonplace. idea is generally referred to as Animism.
Presently, AI has reached the point where it can generate poetry
and even art. This stokes our anxieties, as this sort of creativity This belief is best exemplified for us through certain Y kai –
defined humanity for millennia. We are beginning to reevalu- supernatural Shinto spirits of Japanese folklore who exist along-
ate our uniqueness as a species. side humans, sometimes as transformations of everyday objects.
One of the better-known examples Y kai is the Kasa-obake
I believe that focusing on well-known robots in pop culture appearing in the famous story Night Parade of One Hundred
is the best way to analyse this subject, because the media reveal Demons. Looking like a transformed umbrella with one leg, one
our hopes and fears. Although we lack real-world equivalents eye, a smiling mouth, and two spindly arms, the Kasa-obake is
of Terminators and Astro Boys, these examples nevertheless one of many Y kai derived from originally inanimate objects.
reveal Western fears and Japanese aspirations respectively for This type of Y kai is classified as a Tsukumogami (literally ‘Tool
sentient machines. Spirit’). In his book, An Introduction to Y kai Culture: Monsters,
Ghosts, and Outsiders in Japanese History (2017), anthropologist
The Soul: East versus West Kazuhiko Komatsu writes how any object lasting for a hundred
The Western perception of robots is perhaps best understood years acquires a Y kai spirit. This can be anything, from umbrel-
through GWF Hegel’s ‘Master and Slave dialectic’ in The Phe- las to sandals to crockery and even dish rags – all of these can
nomenology of Spirit (1807). Hegel argues that the ownership of a have a spiritual presence. This process of transformation is noth-
slave results in the dehumanisation of the master. So our use of ing divine, simply an everyday facet of the natural. There is no
robots and technology dehumanises us. Moreover, for Hegel, the hierarchy, no Master-Slave relationship. Instead, these once-
soul (that is, a self-aware mind) can only exist if it is consciously inanimate beings become simply another species that inhabits
acknowledged. In essence, other minds determine the worth of our world. Of course, robots are no exception.
another being, and in doing so enforce their superiority.
Just as Japanese belief provides a means of rationalising the robot
In terms of religion, Judeo-Christian belief explicitly estab- as part of nature, acceptance of the machine is evident in Japanese
lishes humans as only ‘a little lower than the angels’ (Psalm 8:5).
Not only is a soul divinely bestowed upon Adam directly, but a
natural hierarchy results, as best exemplified in Genesis 1:26: “And
God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and
let him have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl
of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every
creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.” Western ethics is
founded on placing humans above all other organic life.

This belief only evolved in the Enlightenment era. Even as
traditional religious values were scrutinised, philosophers such
as Jean-Jacques Rousseau romanticised the natural world.
Rousseau believed that society has an inherently corrupting
influence on humanity, that the natural is inherently superior
to the artificial, and that humanity is better than both. One of

16 Philosophy Now August/September 2020

Future Shocks

culture. Now there is even a robot monk, Mindar, designed to At first Osamu Tezuka’s Astro Boy and James Cameron’s
recite Buddhist sermons and installed at the Kodaiji temple in T-800 may not seem like they have a lot in common. One
Kyoto. For more on Japan’s complicated love affair with robots, debuted in a sci-fi horror movie, and the other is one of Japan’s
see historian Yuji Sone’s book Japanese Robot Culture: Performance, most recognisable cartoon mascots. Yet, they are both
Imagination, and Modernity (2016). In Japan it is widely held that humanoid robots, and both exemplify their culture’s responses
we are defined by how we interact with other entities. The human to rapid technological development.
may be defined by the non-human. Hence, Japan seems quite com-
fortable with Robot Cafés and Robot Hotels – places where people American writer and Astro boy translator Frederik L. Schodt
interact with robot baristas and receptionist automata, sometimes says in The Astro Boy Essays (2007) that Astro (introduced in
even bowing to them in greeting. Unsurprisingly, the Westerner 1951) symbolises the Japanese rebuilding after World War II,
is less comfortable with a HAL 9000 taking our burger order. along with economic growth and innovations such as the Tokyo
Tower, the first highway, and the Bullet Train. As such, Astro
Both Japanese and Western philosophy reinforce the idea of embodies Japan’s economic perspective, as well as its religious
the robot as a reflection of humanity. However, the Japanese assumptions. It’s a far cry from Frankenstein’s ungodly mon-
classify robots as part of a greater cosmology, whereas the West- ster. There is an optimism to Astro Boy; a childlike fusion of a
erner lives in perpetual anxiety about technology, torn between nuclear energy reactor and a strong sense of justice, he embod-
desire for mastery over nature and fear of possible consequences. ies the strengths of the artificial and the natural combined.
Japanese and Western religious assumptions also determine the
perception of the soul and whether or not something is alive. Astro Boy’s narrative follows what could be called a ‘strug-
This is important, as it means that the prevailing religiously- gle for recognition’. In his book, Struggle for Recognition: The
derived metaphysics is the underlying factor that influences our Moral Grammar of Social Conflicts (1996), the German philoso-
view of technology, and of AI development in particular, which pher Axel Honneth presents the struggle for recognition as a
in turn has implications for society. After all, there is a big dif- Hegelian idea describing an entity fighting to reaffirm their
ference between believing a sentient machine will accomplish existence, independence, and freedom. But for Hegel, this term
spiritual enlightenment or go on a genocidal rampage. referred to human slaves, not superpowered robots. There are
certainly antagonist robots, and robot rivals, throughout Astro
Astro Boys versus Terminators Boy, but that moral complexity is no different to that for only
That Japan and the West have different views of technology is humans, or even Y kai in Japan. Even Astro makes mistakes
clearest from the media. I’m going to explore Astro Boy (called now and again. But through it all he remains an idealistic
Mighty Atom in Japan) and The Terminator. Japanese robot freedom fighter, standing up for machine accep-
tance in a hostile human world.

CARTOON © PAUL WOOD 2020 PLEASE VISIT WOODTOON.CO.UK

“Oi you... We don’t like your sort in here!”

August/September 2020 Philosophy Now 17

Future Shocks

This is made clearest in his debut. In his origin story, his phies have influenced our interpretation of machine sentience.
antagonistic creator, Dr Tenma – who created Astro Boy to
replace his deceased son – is furious that Astro is not human. An Existential Crisis
Tenma’s first appearance sees him selling his robotic creation
to a circus, where it is denied rights, stripped of clothes, and Beyond robots, we incorporate technology with our own bodies
forced to perform as a sub-species. in prosthetics, medicine, and health-tracking apps. As we con-
tinually update ourselves, our systems, and even our art, the
The West is undeniably more comfortable with robot slaves. perception of what it means to be human is changing rapidly.
In Star Wars, R2D2 and C3PO are bought and sold despite In essence, however, according to Donna Harraway’s A Cyborg
their sentience. Rossum’s Universal Robots were simply hi-tech Manifesto (1990), we are all cyborgs, defined as hybrids of man
butlers at first; as were Robot B9 from Forbidden Planet and the and machine. Examples such as using watches to tell the time,
Jetson’s housemaid, Rosie the Robot. Recently, we’ve also seen wearing glasses to correct vision, or using a pacemaker, by defi-
Iron Man’s Jarvis/Vision gain popularity because, despite being nition make us cyborgs. No way near as dramatic as our pop cul-
an intelligent AI, it never challenges Tony Stark’s human-first ture depicts. So why should robots and cyborgs be feared?
values. The fact is that in the West, robots are meant to be slaves
and we their rightful masters. The few exceptions that come to With increasing automation costing people’s jobs and liveli-
mind are Marvin the Paranoid Android from Hitchhikers Guide hoods, the questions of one’s obsoleteness, uniqueness, and
to the Galaxy, Bender in Futurama, or Kryten in Red Dwarf, all mortality unsurprisingly manifest in the automaton. As our
of which were designed for comedic subversion. economy shifts, so too does our perspective. This is clearest in
our politics, with debates of bringing in basic incomes to better
The West also has a greater fixation on the robot antagonist – embrace an automated way of life, for example.
a modern Frankenstein’s monster, exemplified by the T-800 from
The Terminator. Whereas Astro Boy is symbolic of the technologi- This isn’t solely about economic or religious definitions.
cal progress and optimism of post-war Japan, The Terminator Obsolescence also manifests in how we perceive our own mor-
reveals the danger of a technologically dependent world and the tality and legacy. Death is a common theme throughout robot
consequences of machines becoming self-aware, as the Skynet AI narratives, explicit or not. There’s a reason the term ‘killer
turns against its human creators on a global scale in nuclear robot’ is practically a sub-genre in itself. Confronting a killer
Armageddon. Released in 1984, the US at the time was seeing a robot is to confront one’s fear of death.
boom in consumer technology amidst the backdrop of the Cold
War, and the T-800 was a chilling reminder of nuclear dangers. Japanese robots are destroyed and rebuilt repeatedly. Astro
The Terminator franchise has further modernised, to reveal more Boy and Mechagodzilla both exemplify this – with the latter built
current fears. Amidst countless reports of the dangers of social around the corpse (still housing the spirit) of the original mon-
media leading to depression, radicalising our politics, and dehu- ster in Godzilla vs. Mechagodzilla II (1993). This harkens back to
manising us, it’s no surprise that in 2015’s Terminator Genisys one the Japanese perspective on death. Schodt theorises it as a type
of Skynet’s recent iterations was as a mobile app. of reincarnation. Astro Boy is blown apart, destroyed, upgraded,
and rebuilt, just as naturally as the human spirit transcending
In their cognitive and social research, K.F. MacDorman and the dying body into a newly born one. The concept also has real-
H. Ishiguro have theorised that the eeriness of confronting an world applications. Following the discontinuation of the origi-
uncanny robot is a response to coping with the inevitability of nal Sony AIBO, a robot dog, Buddhist funeral ceremonies were
death, replacement, and the fear that beneath it all, “we are all held for mourners to pay their respects to their deceased robot
just soulless machines” (The Uncanny Advantage of Using Androids pets. In this ceremony the priest performed a ritual to allow the
in Cognitive and Social Research, p.313, 2006). What better embod- spirit to leave the body – just as he would for a human.
iment of our dehumanisation than the Terminator; a lingering
reminder of the anxieties of rapid uncontrolled technological The Western robot defies the Western concept of death too.
development? Designed to blend into their surroundings, these Judeo-Christian belief is very clear on what death means. As Eccle-
robots are a distorted mirror of humanity. Comprised of little siastes 12:7 states: “Then shall the [body’s] dust return to the earth
more than a metal framework covered with lifelike skin and hair, as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.” But a
the T-800 bears an uncanny similarity to man. Thematically, Western robot cannot die; there is no divine creator for the robot;
the roles of master and slave are inverted, with the artificial dom- nor does it have a soul. Despite this, it has the potential to outlive
inating the natural. One Terminator movie directly draws on a us all. In this way our robot dystopias dwell on our organic obso-
religious parallel with the title Judgement Day. leteness and uniqueness. Beyond this, the cyborg, despite being
human at its core, is also met with scepticism, doubt, and fear –
What’s fascinating is that at no point are we supposed to sym- especially if it is an attempt to cheat death and the natural order.
pathise with Skynet, whereas Astro Boy celebrates the struggle and Darth Vader, for example – an iconic cyborg, described as ‘more
eventual acceptance of robots. Over the series, Astro protects machine than man’ – had his moral corruption matched by his
people, attends school, and follows his own judgement. He is physical roboticization. This death denial is a prevalent theme in
flawed, but still learning, as a child would. The only time you sym- Western popular culture, where techno-horrors like the Cyber-
pathise with the T-800 is after it’s been reprogrammed. Only when men in Doctor Who or the Borg in Star Trek: The Next Generation
it’s stripped of its free will do we feel any compassion towards it. seek to purge us of our human individuality, creativity, and free-
dom simply in order to enable us to live on indefinitely.
There are countless more pop culture examples of these dif-
fering viewpoints in both Western and Japanese media. It is This is all reminiscent of the Enlightenment fears of tech-
through many such examples that culturally sustained philoso- nology corrupting nature – albeit it’s far more explicit with
robots literally trying to change or kill us. In this belief system,

18 Philosophy Now August/September 2020

Future Shocks

We need to rationalise the robot as inhuman to justify our supe-
riority, otherwise we jeopardise our own uniqueness.

by Melissa Felder The Enlightened Machine

SIMON & FINN © MELISSA FELDER 2020 PLEASE VISIT SIMONANDFINN.COM I believe that the idea of the robot soul is a particularly prevalent
topic now because of how rapidly AI is challenging our percep-
tions of what machines can and cannot do. Not only are robots
becoming more physically human (a real-world case study is
MIT’s parkour robot, Atlas, which is now capable of humanoid
gymnastics), the processing speed and interactivity is rapidly
improving as well. Hanson Robotics’ Sophia, for example, is capa-
ble of conversing, debating, and even telling jokes. With the devel-
opment of AI comes the potential for creative thinking.

A defining aspect of the Romantic movement was creativity.
Its challenging of tradition brought with it experimental prac-
tices in music and art. Rousseau even believed that only an
uncorrupted human soul – referring to an undefined quality of
greatness in human physical, moral, intellectual, metaphysical,
spiritual, and artistic faculties – allowed people to truly enjoy
the sublime. With this reasoning, only with a soul can you pro-
duce and enjoy music, capacities reserved until now only for
human beings. But over this past decade we have seen AIs com-
posing music, producing art, even writing poetry and free-form
text. There now exist real-world AIs capable of producing clas-
sical music in the style of Mozart and Beethoven, such as Open
AI’s MuseNet. Another electronic composer, AIVA (Artificial
Intelligence Virtual Artist),has been officially recognised by
France’s association for performing rights SACEM (Société des
auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs de musique). Whether this is true
creativity is debatable, as it can be argued to be merely intelli-
gently recombining information from a database. But then
again, people create art based on memories, experiences, and
inspiration from other works. Perhaps this means we’re not so
dissimilar after all. However, for the first time in human his-
tory, we exist alongside virtual artists, writers, and thinkers.
With each new update our exceptionalism is continually chal-
lenged and we must reevaluate what it means to be human.

we set ourselves up to compete with machines rather than co- Conclusion
operate with them.
To question whether robots have souls is to question culture itself.
The cyborg exists in Japanese culture as well, but the con- The Japanese belief that robots can have souls is founded on com-
text is very different. If robots can have a spirit, then it’s pretty monality, equality, and natural cosmology, welcoming mutual co-
clear that a cyborg can too. The infamous body horror sequence operation with our robot counterparts. The West by contrast has
at the end of 1988’s Akira is an example of the dystopian fixa- a culture of human supremacy. Our comfort comes with the cul-
tion with technology warping what is human. At first this looks turally-specific belief that humans should command authority over
like a Western fear, but the context offers a different reading, all things, and the robot is just another thing to serve us.
with Tetsuo’s body disintegrating and Tetsuo reforming as a
cosmic being: a spiritual transcendence. Through their embracing of and respect for technology, the
Japanese have avoided some aspects of the existential unhappi-
Balancing things out, technology is neither a reminder of ness gripping the West. Technology, computers, mobiles, and
one’s mortality nor a threat to it. Japan rationalises the robot algorithms are simply a fact of modern life and have transformed
as a spiritual phenomenon and is indifferent to any existential our interactions. Naturally there comes a need to redefine our
threat it may pose: rather, robots exist in the world as all things increasingly dependent relationships with machinery. Either we
do. By contrast, in Western culture ultimately the human ele- embrace the robot’s uniqueness, or we continue with our human-
ment remains superior, sometimes for purely arbitrary reasons. first agenda lest we confront our own place in the universe.

© JAMES K. WIGHT 2020

James K. Wight has a degree in Japanese and Media from the
University of East Anglia and Meiji Gakuin University, Tokyo,
and an MA from the London Film School.

August/September 2020 Philosophy Now 19

Future Shocks

A Survival Guide for Living in the Simulation

Harry Whitnall considers how best to react if you find out that the world isn’t real.

It’s Sunday. You wake up after a very pleasant sleep. You the supermarket, push to the front of the line at your local McDon-
feel good. You decide to check your email. You have one alds, or listen to music really loudly in the middle of the night.
new email in your inbox; and what d’you know, it’s from
Elon Musk! It contains clear evidence that your entire uni- While you could, maybe this is also not such a good idea, at
verse is a simulation; and the words ‘Don’t show this to anyone’. least from a moral point of view. Just because your peers, like
you, are simulated, this doesn’t mean they don’t have the capac-
Your whole reality is simulated – everything you know, every- ity for negative feelings.
one you love, and even yourself are all an intricate collection
of ones and zeros! What now? When it comes to this simulated universe we live in, you can
conclude with absolute certainty that at least one simulated being
Fret not, for here is a survival guide to life in the simulation. is conscious – yourself. Just like if your world was not a simula-
First, it might be tempting to ignore Elon’s advice and show tion, you cannot know for sure whether everyone else is conscious
all your friends and family this enlightening email. It would or not; but you can see that they show complex behaviour that’s
make fascinating dinner table talk, and maybe you feel like you similar enough to your own to suggest that they are likely to be
owe it to your family to tell them the truth. But before you do conscious as well. Since conscious beings, even simulated ones,
so, stop and think for a bit. Philosophy professor Preston have the ability to feel negative responses to actions, from a moral
Greene has suggested in the article ‘The Termination of Sim- point of view it is not the best idea to start stealing ice-cream from
ulation Science’ (2018) that the discovery that we live in a sim- the supermarket, or push to the front of the line at McDonalds,
ulation may lead to our creators terminating it, so destroying or listen to music really loudly in the middle of the night.
our universe. Consider why such a simulation would be cre-
ated; perhaps for research into how civilization evolved, or per- We can use Mary Ann Warren’s criteria of personhood to
haps to see how it is likely to end; in order to gain a better under- hammer this point home. In the article ‘On the Moral and Legal
standing of history; for science; or maybe just for fun. For three Status of Abortion’ (1973), Warren suggests that to be a person,
of these five reasons the widespread realisation that the uni- and to be treated as such, someone must be conscious (includ-
verse is a simulation would almost certainly jeopardize the ing the capacity to feel pain); able to reason (the ability to cog-
experiment for which the simulation was created. So, perhaps nitively solve complex problems); able to carry out self-moti-
you should heed Elon’s advice and not show anyone this infor- vated activities; able to communicate on an indefinite number
mation. Of course, there is always the possibility that perhaps of topics; and be self-aware. Perhaps the other inhabitants of
our simulation was created to see how humans would react when your simulation do not meet these criteria – in which case, feel
they realise they are in a simulation. In this case if would best free to steal ice-cream, push in line, and blast midnight beats.
to show Elon’s evidence to everyone you know – although, if But if the other inhabitants do meet these criteria, to be a morally
this were the case, surely the creators would have made the infor- good person you may want to refrain from such activities.
mation more accessible and not given you such a difficult deci-
sion – unless part of the point of the simulation was to see what What about your mental health? Now that you know that
decision you’d make in response to the email… in which case your reality is simply simulated, what’s the point of it all?
you should take as long as possible to make your decision, to
ensure you and your fellow simulated humans survive. So to Perhaps you should try to escape?
maximize your chances of survival, perhaps you should not show In some respects your simulated situation is like Robert
anyone the simulation proof, while frequently considering the Nozick's ‘experience machine’ thought experiment from his book
possibility of one day telling everyone. Anarchy, State, and Utopia (1974). Nozick asks us to imagine that
Now that you have ensured the survival of the simulation, Robin scientists have developed a machine that can simulate experiences
Hanson suggests in the article ‘How to Live in a Simulation’ (2001) indistinguishable from those produced naturally outside of the
that it may be in your best interests to become, or remain, a par- machine. Once we step inside we can experience a world of unlim-
ticularly interesting individual, since the creators may want to be ited pleasures in place of mundane and often unpleasant real life.
efficient in their use of computing power, potentially turning But the machine will also make us forget that there is a real life
people off or making individuals less conscious if they’re uninter- to go back to. Nozick argues that we should not plug ourselves
esting or uninfluential. So, if your plans were to simply chill out, into this machine, since pleasant experiences are not the only
eat Doritos and watch Netflix, for your survival’s sake you may things that matter. Other things matter too, like truth, and having
need a change of plan. Perhaps consider a consider a career as a a meaningful purpose, based on reality.
revolutionary, start your own religion, or maybe become a come- While your situation of being in a simulation is very like being
dian. If you’re funny, maybe the creators will keep you around. in the experience machine, there is a key difference. The fact that
What about the way to act, now that you know that the people you have spent your entire life inside the simulation means that
and things aren’t ‘real’? You could steal a tub of ice-cream from for you the simulation is your reality. Leaving it would mean leav-
ing all your friends and family and everything you know behind.
Of course, the Morpheus inside you may tempt you with the red
pill; but, you must ask yourself, is there really a significant differ-

20 Philosophy Now August/September 2020

Future Shocks

ILLUSTRATION © JAIME RAPOSO 2020. TO SEE MORE OF HIS ART, PLEASE VISIT JAIMERAPOSO.COM

ence between being born in the real world and choosing to escape ing of life, in the simulation or out of it? It seems difficult to
via plugging into a simulation, and being born in the simulated think of a fully satisfying answer to a question that has been put
world and choosing to escape to the real world via unplugging on the most ornate pedestal of all questions. ‘To love or to live’
from the simulation? Let’s assume the simulation was made to be sound like something you’d read in a cheap self-help book. The
accurate to reality apart from in ways crucial to the experiment. Epicureans thought that the meaning of life was to seek modest
Then the only ultimate, metaphysical, difference, is that the real pleasures. To me at least, that does not sound very satisfying.
world is made from quarks, gluons, bosons, and the like, while the
simulated world is made from a collection of ones and zeros that Perhaps then you should stop worrying and simply live your
are made to look like quarks, gluons, bosons, and the like. simulated life, being bold enough to stay interesting, and secre-
tive enough as to not reveal Elon Musk’s proof, while constantly
What of the meaning of life? If the universe is simply a simu- pondering whether one day you should, for survival’s sake.
lation, then the meaning of your entire existence boils down to a
scientific experiment or perhaps to being entertainment for the © HARRY WHITNALL 2020
creator beings. This might be a bit disappointing for you. But if
you think about it, what would be a satisfying answer to the mean- Harry Whitnall is at the University of Canterbury, New Zealand,
studying for an honors degree in philosophy, with plans to continue
studying towards a PhD.

August/September 2020 Philosophy Now 21

Meaning

Leo Tolstoy and
The Silent Universe

Frank Martela relates how science destroyed the meaning of life,
but helps us find meaning in life.

If you had everything else you wanted but your life lacked century. They were a key influence on not only Carlyle but also
meaning, would it still be worth living? For the rich Rus- on Søren Kierkegaard and Arthur Schopenhauer – and through
sian count Leo Tolstoy (1828-1910), the towering Schopenhauer, on Friedrich Nietzsche – all of whom played a
author of such classics as War and Peace and Anna Karen- key role in transforming this esoteric expression into the house-
ina, this was not a merely theoretical question. This was a hold phrase for existentialist-type questions that it is today.
matter of life and death: “Why should I live?... What real
indestructible essence will come from my phantasmal, The nineteenth century saw many transformations in West-
destructible life?” was the question he asked himself. In his ern societies, starting with the Industrial Revolution. But I would
autobiography, My Confession (1882), he wrote that as long venture to say that the key force behind the existential crises of
as he was unable to find a satisfactory answer to the question Carlyle, Tolstoy, and others was the emerging atheistic world-
of meaning, “the best that I could do was to hang myself.” view encouraged by science. Living in what Carlyle himself
What makes ‘What’s the meaning of life?’ such a powerful called ‘an Atheistic Century’, the author had lost touch with the
question that inability to deliver a satisfactory answer can stern Calvinist faith his parents had enjoyed. He laments how
push a person to the brink of a suicide? the ‘Torch of Science’ now burns so fiercely that “not the small-
est cranny or doghole in Nature or Art can remain unillumi-
When I started investigating the history of the question, the nated” (Sartor Resartus).
first surprise was how recent it actually is. We often think of it
as an eternal question asked since the dawn of mankind; but Similarly, as regards Tolstoy, it seems no accident that just a
actually, the first recorded usage of the phrase the ‘meaning of few months before writing in his diary that “life on earth has
life’ in English took place as recently as 1834, in Thomas Car- nothing to give” while plunging head-first into existential crisis,
lyle’s highly influential novel Sartor Resartus: “Our Life is com- Tolstoy had been reading about physics, pondering the con-
passed round with Necessity; yet is the meaning of Life itself cepts of gravity, heat and how a ‘column of air exerts pressures’.
no other than Freedom, than Voluntary Force.” In understanding more about the cold laws of nature, he lost his
faith in the transcendent. He notes how he “sought in all the
Before asking the question, Carlyle’s protagonist goes sciences” but “far from finding what I wanted, became convinced
through the classic steps of an existential crisis. First came loss that all who like myself had sought in knowledge for the mean-
of religious faith: “Doubt had darkened into Unbelief… shade ing of life had found nothing.” In a world governed by the mech-
after shade goes grimly over your soul… Is there no God, then?” anistic laws of nature, there was no longer room for purpose.
Without God, the universe becomes cold and silent: “To me
the Universe was all void of Life, of Purpose, of Volition: it was More than a century after the deaths of Carlyle and Tolstoy,
one huge, dead, immeasurable Steam-engine, rolling on, in its the atheistic worldview has penetrated our way of seeing the
dead indifference, to grind me limb from limb.” In a mecha- world to an even greater degree. But do we have the answer to
nistic universe void of any transcendental values, nothing seems the question of meaning that they so desperately sought?
to matter any more.
I am afraid we don’t. In fact, research shows that it is exactly
For Tolstoy, the existential crisis stage was marked by being we citizens of wealthy, developed countries who struggle to find
constantly tormented by the question ‘Why?’ He attended to meaningfulness. In 2013 Professors Shigehiro Oishi and Ed
his estate. But why? Because then his fields would produce more Diener wrote an analysis of a unique survey conducted by Gallup
crops. But why should he care? Whatever he did, whatever he for the journal Psychological Science which included 142,000 respon-
accomplished, sooner or later, all would be forgotten. Sooner dents across 132 nations around the world. It’s one of the broad-
or later, he and everyone dear to him would die and there would est surveys on well-being and happiness ever conducted. Their
be, as he wrote, “nothing left but stench and worms.” Since first finding didn’t come as a surprise: people in wealthier nations
everything vanishes and is finally utterly forgotten, what’s the were on average more satisfied with their lives. However, investi-
point of struggling? gating the relation between wealth and perceived meaning in life,
Oishi and Diener found exactly the opposite pattern: people in
Grasping Hold of Meaning as it Slips Away the wealthier nations were more prone to report that their life
There seems to have been something in the air in the nine- lacked an important purpose or meaning. Indeed, wealthy nations
teenth century that made the question of meaning so salient as such as France, Japan, or the UK were among those where the
to deserve its own phrase. The German Romantics appear to fewest people said that their life had an important purpose, while
have gotten there first, with Friedrich Schlegel and Novalis poor countries such as Togo, Senegal, and Sierra Leone were on
using the phrase der Sinn des Lebens at the turn of the nineteenth top of the list as regards meaningfulness. Lack of meaningfulness
has been linked in several researches to increased thoughts of sui-

22 Philosophy Now August/September 2020

Meaning

Leo Tolstoy by
Sergei Produkin-Gorski
1908

August/September 2020 Philosophy Now 23

Meaning

24 Philosophy Now August/September 2020

Meaning

IMAGE © VENANTIUS J PINTO 2020. TO SEE MORE ART, PLEASE VISIT FLICKR.COM/PHOTOS/VENANTIUS/ALBUMS cide. Oishi and Diener found that lack of religious belief, lead- basis. Sounds like highly meaningful work, right? Not so fast.
ing to a perceived lack of meaning, was a key explanation for why Psychologist William Damon tells how he met a cardiologist
wealthy nations see more suicides on average. This makes it all who was miserable to the point of not getting out of bed in the
the more a burning issue to answer this question: how can one morning. He felt that surgery was not his thing; that he was
find meaning in life in a secularized society? doing it just to please other people. He needed to find a job that,
instead of making his parents happy, could make himself happy.
The Two Elements of Meaning
The point is, meaningfulness is not only about connecting
Luckily, both philosophical and psychological research on the to other people. It is just as much about connecting with one-
topic of meaning has proliferated in recent decades, and an self. One must feel that one is able to follow one’s own values,
answer has started to emerge. pursue one’s own interests, express who one truly is. Instead of
conforming to external expectations, meaningful living requires
First we must separate two issues: the meaning of life, and you to follow your heart.
meaning in life. The first is about life in general or as a whole,
reflected in questions such as ‘Why does the universe exist?’ or Psychological research supports this notion too. For instance,
‘Does humanity have a purpose?’ This is the sort of question research by Professor Rebecca Schlegel and her colleagues has
that lost its answer as a result of scientific naturalism. In a sec- demonstrated that a key source of meaningfulness is authentic
ular cosmos, in a Godless universe governed by natural laws, self-expression. When the researchers asked people to write
there simply isn’t any room for meaning. about their ‘true self’, the length of these stories (which works
as an indication of how much people are in touch with their
However, when I instead ask about meaning in life, I am authentic selves) predicted how meaningful those people found
asking about what makes my life meaningful to me. Where do their lives to be. The same was not true when people were asked
I find purpose to guide my life? This question is not about uni- to write about their ‘usual selves’ or how they behaved in the
versal value, but identifying what things and goals I personally presence of others. Their social self was not closely correlated
find valuable. In other words, what makes me feel that my life with meaning.
is worth living?
How to Make Your Life Meaningful
Everyone answers this question differently. People and places So the most reliable pathways through which to experience
meaningful to one person mean nothing to another. Certain meaningfulness seem to be expressing yourself and contributing to
spots in a forest close to where I spent most of my childhood the well-being of other people. Don’t be obsessed with success, or
summers are virtually sacred to me. For anybody else, its just even happiness. Both these pursuits are prone to leave you feel-
trees, moss, and stones. Yet as we have started to gain more ing empty. Instead, think about in which activities and roles you
knowledge about human psychological makeup and the elements are able to be authentic, then think about how this self-expres-
of human motivation, two general themes have been identified sive activity or role could be used to contribute to others. This
that tend to enhance meaningfulness for almost everyone. is the recipe for a meaningful existence. After finding your own
specific recipe for that, you can then allow the success or hap-
First, when one is able to contribute to something bigger than piness to happen as a side-product of this more existentially
oneself, this is felt as deeply meaningful. One’s life is then valu- healthy pursuit.
able not only to oneself, but is connected to something grander.
Think about Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King, Abraham Of course, how these two elements get satisfied depends on
Lincoln or Mahatma Gandhi. What unites them is that they an individual’s interests, values, skills, and situation in life. One
fought for a cause much greater than their personal lives. person might use their talents for public speaking (self-expres-
sion) to fight for a cause close to their heart (contribution).
Psychological research supports this notion. For instance, in Another could be playing guitar (self-expression) while taking
my own research, I had people play a simple computer game delight in the joy they bring to their audience (contribution). A
under two conditions. One group just played the game; the other hospital janitor might enjoy the concrete results (self-expres-
group was told that their game-playing gathers money for the sion) of upholding the hygiene levels crucial to patient safety
United Nations World Food Programme. Not surprisingly, the in a hospital (contribution). And for many, parenting is a chan-
latter group found the game more meaningful. Contribution nel for both self-expression and contribution. The same goes
has also been shown to play a key role in explaining what makes for many hobbies, and especially for volunteering work. Every-
work meaningful. When we say “I enjoy my current work, but one thus has to find the way of expressing themselves and con-
would like to do something more meaningful”, what we typi- tributing that best suits them and their life situation. Even Leo
cally yearn for is to have more positive impact through our work. Tolstoy. In the midst of his existential crisis, he felt that the last
‘two drops of honey’ that kept him anchored to this world were
So to a significant degree, meaning in life is about making ‘my love for family and for my writing’. In other words, contri-
yourself meaningful to other people. However, there does seem bution and self-expression.
to be more to meaning than contribution.
© FRANK MARTELA 2020
In one of the most influential essays on meaning written in
the last fifty years, The Meaning of Life (1970), the philosopher Frank Martela is a Finnish researcher specializing in the philosophy
Richard Taylor talks about a ‘strange meaningfulness’ relating and psychology of meaning in life. His book A Wonderful Life:
to being able to do the things where one’s interests lie, and so Insights on Finding a Meaningful Existence was published this
satisfying the “inner compulsion to be doing just what we were year by HarperCollins.
put here to do.”

Imagine being a cardiologist who performs complex surgical
heart operations and accordingly saves people’s lives on a daily

August/September 2020 Philosophy Now 25

Meaning

The Meaning of Death

Laszlo Makay, George Marosan Jr. and David Vatai
consider whether death destroys meaning or creates it.

Unsurprisingly, people are obsessed with the mean- account for the viewpoint of physics. After all, biology is essen-
ing of their lives. Many also think that death is the tially based on chemistry, and chemistry is based on physics. At
antithesis of meaning – the single greatest obstacle the most fundamental level of physics, we find the law of con-
to a meaningful life. However, what if this is a mis- servation of energy and matter. This law does not allow annihi-
understanding? Moreover, if we discovered the meaning of lation in the literal sense, only the transformation of matter and
death (if any exists), would it cast light on the meaning of life? energy. Matter/energy cannot be destroyed and it cannot dis-
appear; it can only change.
All of us have heard things like “Everyone dies, so life is
meaningless.” Or taking this logic to a higher level, someone If there is no fundamental physics-level manifestation of
may say: “The unavoidable destruction of the universe – via ‘death’, how should we interpret the concept? According to biol-
heat death, the big crunch, or the big rip, you name it – makes ogy, physics, and systems theory together, death is a so-called
the existence of the entire human race meaningless.” These ‘emergent phenomenon’ within the systems of life or the bio-
simple reasonings seem correct. Our own deepest fears only sphere. For instance, death can be narrowly interpreted as the
serve to help them appear realistic. end of vital signs of an organism, so there would be no death
without biological life. Consequently, death is something that
Things have meaning because they are meaningful to some- needs life first.
body. Once that person dies then nothing matters to them any
more, so surely the things in their life that had meaning no The relationship is unidirectional, since death cannot happen
longer do? Hasty conclusions are usually misleading, and in this without life – but life can exist without death. Yes: according to
case, the conclusions are incorrect. Some meanings or their physics, death is not a necessity. At a fundamental physical level,
bearers can survive our own individual deaths – such as our own all living organisms could rejuvenate their bodies by using free
children or our contribution to society. Many external goals and energy in their environment; and there is no fundamental phys-
achievements may continue to exist after our death. And in some ical cause preventing organisms doing this indefinitely. Many
special cases – for example, sacrificing oneself for a noble cause proliferating unicellular organisms (such as the HeLa immortal
– death may even be necessary to fully realise a meaningful indi- cell line) do not die because of ‘old age’; death only occurs due
vidual life. to environmental influences or accidents. The unicellular organ-
isms living today are the same line as those that started fission
What about the meaninglessness of humanity on a cosmic billions of years ago, continuously dividing and surviving.
scale? It doesn’t hurt to know that science tells us that the longer Immortality, or more precisely, negligible senescence – a lack
the forecasting period, the less reliable the prediction. Any prog- of symptoms of aging in organisms – may even exist in case of
nosis in the range of billions of years is uncertain at best. If we multicellular organisms such as hydras, which do not grow old.
do not know what comprises 95% of the universe, we cannot Many quite complex organisms such as trees live for thousands
be confident of our predictions about it. We cannot even be of years. Of course, in the long term, the likelihood of death for
certain that the universe will ever be destroyed. Consequently, the individuals of even these species rises to 100%, due to acci-
it would be a long shot to find our existence meaningless just dents, disasters, illness, or predators. However, that can take a
because of some uncertain end-of-the-cosmos scenarios set comparatively long time, and does not explain the usual death
untold billions of years in the future. due to old age for individuals of most species. We could even
say that there is something strange with common inevitable
Life and Death Issues death through old age. For example, species have different typ-
If we want to be correct about the meaning of life in the face ical lifespans. The normal timing of the ‘unavoidable’ death
of death, we should first understand some basics about death. from old age of the mayfly, mouse, elephant, and tree varies
species-by-species in an extremely wide range, from days to
‘Life’ has different definitions depending on the perspective thousands of years. Therefore, death from old age is not the
and approach. Someone may say that the basic criteria for life result of being alive in general, but due to species-specific fac-
are the utilization of free energy, reproduction, and the capacity tors. In other words, natural death is a function of their biolog-
for metabolism; but there is no single correct definition. Philos- ical structure, their behavior, and their environment. Dying after
ophy, biology, even astronomy, have divergent descriptions. a mating ritual enables reproduction; or the further life of the
individual helps to support offspring.
The situation with death is similar. Until recently, people who
did not breathe were considered dead. This criterion was so unre- This shows the efficiency of the life-cycles of organisms. Death
liable that being buried alive occurred so often that fear of it was starts to show evolutionarily benefits. A genetically-programmed,
common enough to get its own name: taphophobia. The methods species-specific, timely death frees up natural resources. In every
to establish death slowly became more trustworthy: a lack of pulse species, offspring, requiring living space and resources, repre-
or heartbeat, then observing the non-functioning of the brain. sent the capacity for mutations, and so enable evolutionary adap-

While biology and the medical sciences have their various
definitions of life and death, we should dig even deeper, to

26 Philosophy Now August/September 2020

Meaning

sider death a catastrophe because of our
personal involvement, fear, and loss. We
can see death coming, but we cannot see
its useful effects after our demise.

IMAGE © CECILIA MOU 2020. TO SEE MORE ART, PLEASE INSTAGRAM HER AT @MOUCECILIAART Life and Death Reconsidered

tation. It would be hugely restrictive to see in nature: there are far more mortal So what is death’s meaning? The mean-
the offspring if all the ancestors remained organisms in multicellular species than ing is its contribution to the success, sur-
alive: it would cause them to run out of immortal ones. vival, adaptation, and development of life.
resources and space in the short term, The fact that life is present almost every-
thereby obstructing adaptation in the long So death does not happen out of phys- where on our planet in such a great diver-
term. Thus on the larger scale, death ical, chemical, or biochemical necessity, sity today is only made possible by death.
serves life rather than ruins it. The evo- but because of its useful effects. Death By the same token, death has also con-
lutionary advantages of the eventual pro- does not simply depend on life (since only tributed to the emergence of humanity.
grammed death of organisms has usually the living can die); rather, life – more pre-
proved to be greater than the non-dying cisely, evolutionary processes – gave birth Furthermore, immortality would not
seen in their unaging counterparts, so evo- to death for its own ‘purposes’, with the itself absolve life of apparent meaning-
lution has favored congenital mortality in genesis of the first complex organisms, lessness. In fact, a lack of death would
most cases. That is exactly what we can about seven hundred million years ago or make life unbearable in the long run, as
so. Nevertheless, we as individuals con- well as unsustainable. Immortality would
likely lead to an overcrowded Earth with
societies full of inequalities and social ten-
sions in a collapsing ecosystem. Power-
ful leaders and wealthy individuals would
strive to maintain and increase their
power and wealth; fewer new minds being
born would bring about less innovation;
and immortality’s impact on our already
overstretched natural resources and envi-
ronment would be catastrophic.

Does the meaning of death lead to the
meaning of life, too? We have seen that
death is not an obstacle to a meaningful
life. Besides, it has its own meaning, by
contributing to life. Therefore, life is
meaningful too, is it not?

Unfortunately, death having a purpose
does not automatically give meaning to
life. And if life turns out to be meaning-
less, then death, even if it were evolution-
arily valuable, would also be meaningless.
We have simply removed some common
misconceptions regarding death and its
effect on the meaning of life. Therefore,
we have somewhat reduced the likelihood
of negative answers to whether life has a
meaning. But giving a positive answer to
the ancient question, if possible at all,
requires further research.

© LASZLO MAKAY, GEORGE MAROSAN JR.,

DAVID VATAI, 2020

Laszlo Makay obtained his MSc. in Finance
and Management at the Budapest University
of Economics. George Marosan Jr obtained a
PhD in Philosophy in 1978. He has been a
university professor since 1992. David Vatai
obtained his MSc in English in 2016 and a
minor in Philosophy in 2012 at the University
of Szeged.

August/September 2020 Philosophy Now 27

Shklar Kant
Molière Schopenhauer

Philosophical Misanthropy

Ian James Kidd takes a look at humanity through dark glasses.

The condemnation of humankind is very topical these poignant resignation, or, more cheerfully, a resolute hopeful-
days. Given the global environmental crisis, the rise ness about our improvability. And actually, some philosophical
of far-right ideologies, destabilising social and eco- misanthropes explicitly reject hatred as a response to our collec-
nomic equality, and other moral evils, many people tive moral failings.
issue denunciations of the state of humanity. Sometimes, the
talk is just that – talk: expressions of frustration at our collec- An upshot of this ‘misanthropic pluralism’ is that we can
tive moral failings. Sometimes, though, there is a more practi- recognise the moral awfulness of humanity without drifting into
cal spirit. At the more extreme end are those people who urge hatred, violence, or despair. To do so, though, we need a better
the end of our species, such as anti-natalists, including the Vol- understanding of misanthropy.
untary Human Extinction movement, who say humanity should
stop reproducing. More moderate positions include those call- Defining Misanthropy
ing for a radical transformation of humanity, perhaps in the Oddly, there’s not much philosophical writing on misanthropy.
direction of smaller, simpler ways of life. The collapse of our It’s not a concept that’s really used among moral philosophers.
industrial, consumerist form of life may be succeeded by life
with a different, hopefully better, character – a hope offered for Sometimes it’s connected to pessimism or nihilism, which
example by philosopher and Green activist Rupert Read in his both express bleak visions of human existence. Arthur Schopen-
recent book, Civilization is Finished (2019). hauer (1788-1860) was perhaps the philosophical pessimist par
excellence, and also deeply misanthropic. But pessimism and mis-
An appropriate term for these exercises in the moral con- anthropy aren’t the same concepts: a philosophical pessimist
demnation of humanity is misanthropy. thinks there are deep features to the world in general which
make human happiness or flourishing impossible: absurdity,
In its everyday sense, a misanthrope is someone who hates, meaninglessness, suffering… The philosophical misanthrope,
dislikes, or feels disgust at human beings and tries to avoid by contrast, focuses on our vices and failings. Granted, they are
them. The title character of Molière’s 1666 play, The Misan- closely related, but they’re not the same. I could, for instance,
thrope, Alceste, declares that he ‘hate[s] all men’, some ‘villain- think that human existence is cosmically meaningless without
ous’ and others complicit in their ‘evil’. By the end of the play, also regarding it as morally atrocious. We could be meaning-
the misanthrope declares his desire to flee his corrupt and cor- less but, broadly, morally admirable.
rupting society.
A recent defence of philosophical misanthropy is David E.
Although the term has largely fallen into disuse, it still has Cooper’s book, Animals and Misanthropy (2018). As the title sug-
this sense: to be misanthropic is to hate humanity and want to gests, his argument is that an honest appraisal of our treatment
escape from it, or perhaps to do violence to it. The philosopher of animals justifies a misanthropic verdict on humanity as it has
Judith Shklar warns that misanthropy is dangerous – it has the come to be. The plight of hundreds of billions of non-human ani-
power to “make us miserable and friendless, reduce us to spiri- mals shows a whole array of our vices and failings: arrogance, bru-
tual nausea, and deprive us of all pleasures except invective” tality, callousness, greed, hubris, mindlessness, wilful ignorance,
(Ordinary Vices, 1984). Hatred and violence, she rightly warns, vanity… the list is long and depressing. Cooper focuses on ani-
are a poor basis for a good life. If misanthropy necessarily mals, although we can look at other areas of human life too. What
involves this, then misanthropy ought to be avoided. Fortu- we find, argues the philosophical misanthrope, is that human exis-
nately, it doesn’t. tence is saturated with failings and vices, including arrogance
(again), cold-heartedness, dogmatism, greed, hypocrisy, insensi-
Defining misanthropy as ‘a hatred or dislike of human beings tivity to beauty, myopia, moral laziness, selfishness, shoulder-
or humanity’ is much too narrow. There are many forms of mis- shrugging indifference to the suffering of others, violence, waste-
anthropy, only some of which involve hatred. Confronted with fulness, and doubtless many others for which we don’t have names.
these failings, we can feel anger – or bitterness, disappointment,

28 Philosophy Now August/September 2020

Buddha Confucius Zhuangzhi

Given all this, it’s easy to understand misanthropy’s critique. clear, too, that the target isn’t individual people. The verdict is
However, a catalogue of human failings isn’t enough to secure aimed at something collective: humanity; human civilization;
a charge of misanthropy. Imagine a critic who accepts that we human ways of life. A misanthrope can like, admire, and even
have failings, but insists they are relatively superficial, occa- love some individual people – most obviously, the rare few who
sional, and localised. They’ll argue that our vices are confined are relatively free of our collective failings. That said, a misan-
to extreme situations, such as war or political displacement – thrope will regard some individuals as especially exemplifying
conditions that force us to become selfish and violent, against those collective failings. Donald Trump, for instance, is often
our better nature – or that these vices are confined to extreme described by her critics as a symbol of all that’s wrong with us
people, such as psychopaths or moral monsters, who are hardly as a species – a living manifestation of such vices as greed, hubris,
morally representative of humanity as a whole. and vanity.
It’s just this sort of moral facelift that is rejected by a misan-
thrope. They think there’s nothing unusual or occasional about So misanthropy comes in many forms, but this pluralism cre-
our failings – they’re built into and spread throughout our entire ates a tricky set of moral and practical issues that come together
way of life. As evidence, they’ll point out that we don’t need to in a difficult question: how should a person live once they deeply
look long or hard to find instances of human vices and failings. internalise a misanthropic vision? Clearly, a critical vision of
Sometimes, all that’s needed is to look at the news, or out of the the awful moral condition of humanity isn’t some cold, abstract
window, or in the mirror. Granted, most of our vicious behaviour doctrine, without implications for our conduct and life. Accept-
may be fairly low-key – small acts of cruelty; a steady stream of ing that vision means changing how you live, feel, and think.
little untruths. Montaigne called these ‘ordinary vices’, since they’re Everyone who writes about misanthropy explores this question.
woven into our ordinary and everyday habits, activities, and ways It is, after all, a dramatic theme for playwrights and others, too.
of talking. Indeed, if we think that our vices only really count in
their extreme forms, then we’re self-servingly undercounting. Within the history of philosophy, Western and Eastern, I
A philosophical misanthrope therefore insists that our vices think we can discern at least four main misanthropic stances. Here
and failings have features that help to guard their claims against a stance consists of a dominant emotion or viewpoint accompa-
the philanthropic response. Three of these features are that our nied by a range of activities or commitments. It’s a way of both
failings are entrenched, pronounced, and ubiquitous: they are deeply making sense of the world and trying as best one can to navi-
built into our activities, projects, and institutionalised ways of gate it – a way of living out one’s misanthropy, as it were. Doubt-
life; they are often obvious, as when we talk about our ‘naked less there are other ways to be a misanthrope too. But these
cruelty’ or ‘blatant selfishness’; and they are spread throughout stances are the most common.
the world, except perhaps for a few secluded spaces. The mis-
anthrope needs to make these three points, otherwise they fall Let’s start with the two stances described by one of the most
short of a moral condemnation of humanity. influential of Western moral philosophers, Immanuel Kant.
A good example of people who do make these points, are those
modern radical ‘eco-misanthropes’ who regard destructiveness, The Enemy and the Fugitive
indifference to nature, and wastefulness as utterly built into our Among the few philosophers who devoted attention specifically
ways of life, at the foundations. Another example are feminists to misanthropy, Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) is perhaps the
who argue that dogmatism, injustice, and exploitativeness are most eminent, at least in the Western tradition. He distinguishes
deeply baked into systems of patriarchy such that if you remove at least two problematic misanthropic stances. First is ‘the
those vices, the patriarchal system collapses. Clearly, we’re seeing Enemy of Mankind’, who, dominated by hatred and disgust at
that there are many forms of philosophical misanthropy. The humanity’s failings, feels driven to acts of violence. Sometimes
common core is the moral condemnation of humankind, but these might be literal acts of physical violence – the sort that
that can be motivated by many different sorts of concern – for aim at disrupting social life, maybe, or which simply inflict harm
the plight of animals, the destruction of nature, the oppression on others. In other cases, the violence is more symbolic, such
of women... A further variation is in the different attitudes the as controversial challenges to cherish ideals. Some eco-misan-
misanthrope can take, depending on the specific target: hateful thropes fit this profile: the ones who want to ‘unmake civiliza-
anger, hopeful activism, even despairing surrender. It should be tion’, ‘tear it all down’, or who generally anticipate the extinc-
tion of humanity with quiet satisfaction.

A second misanthropic stance is what Kant calls ‘the Fugi-
tive from Mankind’. Unlike criminal fugitives, moral fugitives

August/September 2020 Philosophy Now 29

flee out of fear, not guilt. They’re dominated by fear – of what about them is itself a sign of disorder. Preaching ethics is itself
we are, the harm we do, and the morally corrupting effects of a sign of decay, of a world going wrong. When the world is in
being among us. Doubtless many Fugitive misanthropes will good moral order, predicted Laozi, there will be no need for
have their own share of failings; but they seek to avoid further sages, rituals, and the teaching of virtue.
moral corruption by escaping. This might mean literally escap-
ing, to a desert island or otherwise going off-grid; or for many The Indian and Chinese schools generally rejected hateful-
earlier generations, retreating into a secluded religious com- ness as an attitude towards humanity. Buddhists regard hate as
munity or another space relatively insulated from the a vice, for instance, while, even if they disagree on much else,
entrenched failings of the wider world. When the Buddha Confucians and Daoists agree that the true sage is neither hate-
declared the superiority of the monastic life, his reason was that ful nor violent.
it’s free of those corrupting influences which feed our vices –
materialistic desire or sensual temptation, say. The case is less clear-cut with the fearful moral Fugitive. The
Buddha taught the superiority of a secluded monastic life, and
Kant rejects both these stances, since he rejects hatefulness, Daoists too were suspicious of the corruptions of the ‘artifice’ of
although not because it’ll make us miserable and friendless. city life. But other Chinese schools reject the Fugitive spirit. Con-
Rather, he thinks that we ought to respect the moral dignity of fucianism, Mohism, and Legalism wanted to reform the social
our fellows, even when they consistently fail. Hatred is not only world, not abandon it. Confucius sometimes declared his frustra-
incompatible with respect, it destroys it. This is why Kant judges tion and announced a desire to sail away to some faraway land,
the Enemy stance as ‘contemptible’. Fugitive misanthropy is but then calmed down and returned to his moral mission. So Indian
similarily rejected. Granted, there may be no hatred here, nor and Chinese traditions offer us different misanthropic stances.
impulses to violence; but there cannot be genuine human good-
ness without human community, either. Despite his reputation We might call the first of these the Activist stance. Misan-
as an austere thinker, Kant affirms that we’re moral and social thropes of this kind are motivated by hope. They see the
creatures. A Fugitive cannot flourish precisely insofar as they entrenched moral failings of the world, and respond with deter-
flee from others. Perhaps they can live, isolated and secluded – mined commitment to change this. Their sense of hope shows
but they cannot live well. itself in ambitious large-scale efforts aimed at reconstructing
our collective condition. This may include moral teaching, reli-
The Enemy and Fugitive misanthropic stances existed long gious preaching, or socio-political activism, or some combina-
before Kant. If we push back to classical antiquity, we can find tion of these.
people who reported an abiding hatred or fear of humanity.
Plutarch declared that “he who hates vices, hates humanity” – Confucius (c. 551–479 BC) is a good example of the Activist.
pretty much the motto of the Enemy. Heraclitus of Ephesus, There were many Activist strategies within his difficult life per-
the ‘weeping philosopher’, also lamented the vices and folly of formed to repair the moral infrastructure. Form a community
his peers, eventually – so legend tells – fleeing to live in the moun- of disciples. Spread the world. Perform good works. Consult
tains. Probably that’s exaggerated, although it illustrates an with rulers, if they will listen. Act as vivid models of the virtues
understandable desire to abandon the human world. But hatred to inspire others. Restore the rites and a respect for tradition.
and fear can be difficult to sustain. Perhaps misanthropy is more
bearable if it’s rooted in other emotions or understandings. We The hopeful Activist is a more attractive figure to modern sen-
can find these other misanthropic stances by looking East. sibilities than either of Kant’s misanthropes; certainly to genera-
tions inspired by social justice movements, climate activism, and
The Activist and the Quietist other determined efforts to save the planet. But we shouldn’t rush
to embrace it uncritically. Other misanthropes urge caution about
The systematic appraisal of our moral condition and potential enthusiastic world-changing Activism. The Buddha, for instance,
has been deeply rooted in Indian and Chinese philosophical tra- was averse to ambitious Activist projects. For one thing, the deep
ditions from their earliest known stages. Looking at the Indian causes of our moral awfulness are entrenched features of reality
schools, the picture is bleak: human beings are trapped in cycles – dukkha and the transience of all ‘conditioned’ beings. Such
of dukkha (‘suffering’, ‘imbalance’, or ‘dis-ease’) and rebirth, causes are coped with through personal ethical and spiritual prac-
within a ‘wheel of suffering’ driven by our vices and failings – tice, but they cannot be changed by social and political actions.
especially, for the Buddhist, the ‘unwholesome roots’, of hate, For another thing, muscular Activism is inconsistent with the
delusion, and greed. All the classical Chinese schools, too, share Buddhist virtues of modesty, quietude, restraint, and equanim-
a grim picture of the state of humanity. They saw a world dom- ity. This is why we need a further stance.
inated by cruelty, greed, mendaciousness, selfishness, instabil-
ity, waste of talents, relentless violence. The Confucians, lament This fourth main misanthropic stance is Quietism. Like all
that the rites and the teachings of the Sage Kings are forgot- philosophical misanthropies, it reflects a negative, critical
ten. For the Daoists, human beings no longer follow the Way appraisal of the moral condition of humanity. What distinguishes
of Heaven. For the Mohists and Legalists, only austere moral a Quietist is their spirit of resignation. They judge that little, if
self-discipline and strict systems of penalty and punishment anything, can be done to transform humanity for the better. Per-
could change our immoral condition for the better. Granted, haps they judge that the immensity of our failings is beyond
the Indian and Chinese schools emphasise many good things repair. Perhaps they fear that any grand transformative efforts
too – virtues, wisdom, compassion, mindfulness, ritual conduct, run the risk of backfiring, maybe by giving powerful new scope
enlightenment, the Way. But the very fact that they must teach to our grandiosity, hubris, and capacities for self-delusion. Better
to respond in more modest ways. Quietist misanthropes there-
fore find ways of accommodating to our collective failings. They
avoid entanglement in the more corrupting areas of human life,

30 Philosophy Now August/September 2020

where the temptations of ambition and power are strongest, and Philosophical Haiku
seek out simpler, inconspicuous ways of living, away from the
busyness and haste of the mainstream, keeping their heads down PLOTINUS
and remaining safely distant from the fray, where they strive to
cultivate virtues such as detachment and diffidence. (204/5–270 CE)

A good example is found in the Daoist, Zhuangzi (c.369-286 All flows from the One,
BC), the Daoist philosopher of ‘butterfly dream’ fame. Among My soul flies to Intellect
modern Western audiences, Zhuangzi is celebrated as a roman- I long to return
tic, even anarchistic, sort of figure – a cheerful, long-haired,
barefoot iconoclast, cocking a snook at pompous sages and Born in Egypt, Plotinus first appears in the history books as a
eschewing the formalities of Confucian ritualism. Actually, student in Alexandria, where he studied Greek philosophy for
things are more complex. His vision of human life was bleak. eleven years. Then he did a stint in the Roman army, which was
Most people are alienated and confused, he thought: painfully to head East, his aim being to learn from Persian and Indian
fluxing, ‘worried then sad’, as their life ‘rushes on like a gallop- philosophers (presumably he anticipated being able to take time out
ing horse’, having forgotten the Way (the Dao). from pillaging, killing and oppressing). He later came to Rome where he
spent the rest of his life teaching, developing a system of metaphysics
Zhuangzi’s own life was one of modest accommodation to that would become known as Neoplatonism. In his rather toadying biog-
this world. The Book of Zhuangzi shows him eschewing political raphy of Plotinus, his pupil Porphyry describes him as a ‘god-like man’,
office, avoiding the controversies of disputatious scholars, keep- which is a nice way of saying he was a mystic who said mysterious,
ing company only with a few trusted friends, and cultivating beautiful, and frequently incomprehensible things.
spontaneous affection for birds and beasts. Such modest strate-
gies enabled him to live within the human world and either cope In short, Plotinus thought there is a hierarchy of existence, at the top
with or avoid its corruptions and temptations. of which is the One (what else would you call it?), which he likened to
Plato’s Form of the Good. Below the One, there is Intelligence (what we
The Misanthropic Predicament would call intellect); and below that, Soul (which includes perception
A long list could be given of Enemies, Fugitives, Activists, and and other biological functions). By emanating its mystical powers in an
Quietists. Across the world’s philosophical traditions, these four overflowing of itself, like light from the sun, the One creates Intelligence
misanthropic stances recur again and again. Each shows us a and Soul, and is thus the source of all being. The One is perfect, the
particular way of trying to live out a misanthropic vision. other facets of the world increasingly less so. Actual physical bodies,
Granted, we’d need to spell out their details in light of some like those we live in, are so revolting and despicable as not to rate a
interesting questions I’ve not discussed. What is the relation of place in the hierarchy. In its perfection the One is unknowable, but at
misanthropy to religion? Is it sensible or fair to condemn human- the same time the ultimate object of desire to which our souls wish to
ity, rather than specific groups of humans? What if the misan- return. Our goal in life is to achieve union with the One, which we do by
thropic verdict is exaggerated? And even if it’s true, should we becoming utterly absorbed in contemplating it. Of course, given that
broadcast the bad news about humanity? contemplating the unknowable isn’t easy, this might be something of a
challenge. But it’s sure to be character-building.
All of these are important questions, but we’re only likely to
want to explore them if we’re already persuaded of the philo- © TERENCE GREEN 2020
sophical seriousness of misanthropy. This means rejecting the
dictionary definition of it as ‘hatred of humanity’. There are Terence Green is a writer, historian and lecturer who lives in
many ways to be a philosophical misanthrope, only one of which Paekakariki, New Zealand.
is characterised by hatred. In fact, it may be that the misan-
thrope themself doesn’t settle into a single stance. Looking at August/September 2020 Philosophy Now 31
the writings of many misanthropes, I more often see a painful
oscillation between different stances – moments of angry hatred
followed by resigned calm that rise up into optimistic hope and
back again. Confucius often wanted to give up, but was always
pulled back by his hope for humanity. Into his later years, how-
ever, his Activism gave way to a resigned Quietism. What this
suggests is that the real philosophical task isn’t about living out
a single misanthropic stance; it’s about dealing with the emo-
tionally and morally difficult oscillation between stances.
Coping with this is the heart of the misanthropic predicament.

© DR IAN JAMES KIDD 2020

Ian James Kidd is a lecturer in philosophy at the University of
Nottingham. His website is www.ianjameskidd.weebly.com

• This article is the text of the George Ross Memorial Lecture given at the

Philosophy Now Festival in London in January 2020. You can watch it

online at https://philosophynow.org/videos

Neoliberalism & Social Control

Arianna Marchetti looks at how the Continental philosophers Michel Foucault
and Byung-Chul Han view free-market politics.

‘Neoliberalism’ is a catch-all term that refers to governmentality is an art of government which utilises tech-
the promotion of free-market capitalism, the niques ranging from the self-control of the individual to biopo-
supremacy of market value, and privatization. litical control of the population. In this way, the concept of gov-
Its opponents say it results in the exploitation ernmentality has broadened our understanding of power to
of labour and widening income inequality, among other things. include a form of control exercised beyond traditional political
However, a simple and clear-cut definition of neoliberalism means (such as force, or the control of material resources) and
does not exist since there is still much disagreement about its which can manifest itself in more subtle ways.
meaning. In A Brief History of Neoliberalism (2005), the Marxist
thinker David Harvey defines neoliberalism as “a theory of Foucault argued that the internalisation of discourses of con-
political economic practices that proposes that human well- trol (for instance, when someone exploited agrees in their own
being can best be advanced by liberating individual mind that neoliberal policies are just and right) is an important
entrepreneurial freedoms and skills within an institutional aspect of neoliberal domination. Interestingly though, he main-
framework characterized by strong private property rights, free tained a positive attitude towards self-optimization within this
markets, and free trade.” According to Harvey, neoliberalism system, that is, of making the most of oneself and one’s possibil-
strives to promote wealth accumulation and economic elites ities. With the introduction of the term ‘technology of the self’
through a discourse of liberty. In neoliberal thinking, Hegel’s in a seminar of the same name in 1982, Foucault started talking
famous ‘master and slave’ dialectic becomes a little blurred, about the voluntary practices and behaviours people perform to
since individuals are not exploited downtrodden workers but transform themselves. He argued that what people do to try to
entrepreneurs in control of their means of production. The reach happiness, wisdom, perfection, and so on, are expressions
worker is free to do as she wishes. of self-determination and independence even within neoliberal
cultures. According to Foucault such efforts provide the individ-
Foucault ual with autonomy in so far as they involve a project of self-deter-
One of the first philosophers who tried to understand neoliber- mination which makes the individual less dependent on external
alism not only in terms of economics but as a philosophy of circumstances. They also serve to create ways of thinking about
human subjects and society was the French philosopher Michel oneself that are a source of pleasure.
Foucault (1926-84). In a series of lectures at the Collège de
France at the end of the 1970s, Foucault presented a new polit- But can self-optimization be an expression of self-determi-
ical-economic analysis of the then emerging free-market trend. nation in neoliberal societies? After all, self-optimization is
He introduced two concepts, namely, the idea of the subject as anchored in the need to acquire legitimisation within a society:
an entrepreneurial self, and the idea that the market can be a it becomes real only when recognised by others. In this way what
validator of truth. According to Foucault, the establishment of one takes to be the optimization of one’s life will be strongly
the neoliberal way of looking at economic relationships coin- influenced by norms established by the powerful. We look at
cides with a new mode of exploitation of peoples’ activities, which them and feel that we too should strive for wealth, fame, or pop-
he calls governmentality. ularity. In this sense, rather than being an opportunity for self-
affirmation and self-determination, self-optimization seems to
Foucault’s ‘governmentality’ is a form of social control which be another instance of normalisation we impose on ourselves: it
relies on disciplinary institutions – police, law courts, schools, is a subtle and efficient form of control.
and so on – and the creation of a type of knowledge which pro-
motes the internalisation of certain discourses or ways of think- Han
ing, through which individuals govern themselves according to In his book Psychopolitics: Neoliberalism and New Technologies of
the thinking of these institutions. Power (2017), the Korean-German philosopher Byung-Chul
Han put forward another new concept to analyse forms of dom-
Throughout Foucault’s writings – and widely used in politi- ination in neoliberal societies: psychopolitics. The term refers
cal philosophy ever since – is woven the notion of biopolitics. It to the type of control that societies exercise through the use of
usefully designates the entanglement between life, politics, and personal information. According to Han, the web, social media,
history. Simply put, biopolitics denotes a form of politics that and big data are core tools of modern neoliberalism, since they
aims at controlling the population through medicine (see Fou- enable a more efficient and stable form of control. This control
cault’s The History of Madness, 1961) and the regulation of sex- is exercised in a very different way from traditional authoritar-
uality. Biopolitics is a type of power that aims on the one hand ian or totalitarian means of control, since instead of limiting
to maintain life at its optimal state, of health, and on the other communication, it stimulates it: “The society of digital control
hand, at creating habits that guarantee the stability of the system makes massive use of freedom: it is possible only thanks to vol-
of production, the extant social hierarchy, and its thinking. And untary self-exposure, self-denudation... the disclosure of data

32 Philosophy Now August/September 2020

Michel Foucault burnouts that come from the constant self-
by Woodrow Cowher exploitation of one’s body and psyche, in
order to be productive. This healing pro-
IMAGE © WOODROW COWHER 2020 PLEASE VISIT WOODRAWSPICTURES.COM cess is itself seen as something meant to
increment productivity; it is not primarily
seen in terms of a good life. The improve-
ment of performance is the main objective.

Within this system, positive thinking
drives self-optimization, and in a sense
facilitates the illusion that if you work hard
enough you’re guaranteed to achieve a
satisfying life. To put this assumption into
question is dangerous, since it may anni-
hilate the self-optimization imperative, or
in other words, the duty of achieving ever-
greater performance. The neoliberal ide-
ology of self-optimization represents
almost a new kind of religion:

does not take place coercively but we do or choose, but we accept and fully “The infinite work on the ego resembles
responds to an inner need” (p.18). In this trust our emotions to guide our reactions.
form of neoliberalism, “The smartphone As Han writes: self-observation and self- examination in
is not only an effective means of surveil-
lance… it is also a mobile confessional. “Emotions are performative in the sense the Protestant religion, and they, in turn,
Facebook is the church” (p.22). that they evoke certain actions: like incli-
nations, they represent the energetic and represent a technique of subjectivation and
By willingly sharing our information, sensory foundation to action... They con-
we make surveillance easier. Big data for stitute the pre-reflexive, semi-conscious, domination. Instead of looking for sins,
example is an extremely powerful psy- bodily-instinctive place of action, of which
chopolitical tool which allows insights one is often not properly aware. Neolib- now negative thoughts are the ones to be
into the dynamics of social communica- eral psychopolitics takes possession of the
tion and the patterns of human emotion, so as to influence the actions on sought, the ego struggles with itself as
behaviour, and consequently the devel- the pre-reflexive level. Through emotion,
opment of techniques of control or influ- it insinuates itself deeply into the person against an enemy” (Psychopolitics, p.41).
ence. For instance, by having access to and consequently represents an extremely
our online thoughts and desires, the tech- efficient medium of the individual’s psy- This new psychopolitical form of power
nologies of control have the ability to chopolitical control” (Psychopolitics, p.59). is more efficient than the traditional means
study our emotional responses and of control because it makes rebellion
exploit them. Instead of being dominated Applied psychopolitics also invents new almost impossible. Those who fail in the
through discipline and violence, individ- forms of control, such as a myriad work- neoliberal system live their failure as their
uals are dominated by sensual or emo- shops training our self-management, and own responsibility, and in the best case,
tional appeal and addiction. various other activities which are supposed direct their frustration at increasing their
to augment our efficiency. According to productivity (‘auto-correction’). In the
The neoliberal system benefits from Han, neoliberal domination doesn’t only worst case, their frustration at their fail-
mobilising emotions because emotions take advantage of the individual during his ure to create for themselves wealth or fame
give rise to quick reactions; they facilitate working hours, but tries to dominate his makes individuals depressed and self-
fast change; and they open up new needs entire life, in order to sacrifice it to the destructive – but not critical towards the
and fields of consumption. Emotions can attainment of an ever-more-productive system that has fostered this depression
be triggered easily and can create fast workforce. And citizens voluntarily self- and self-destructiveness.
responses. Through emotional stimula- optimize, trying to constantly upgrade their
tion, ideas also find their way into our functioning within society. Every weakness Psychopolitics is founded on the prin-
memories more easily. Not only that, but needs to be eliminated, that is, healed. Heal- ciple of freedom, and that’s what makes it
emotions trigger instinctual reactions ing in the neoliberal society means to suc- so efficient. Modern neoliberalism exploits
which we are not able to consciously con- cessfully deal with exhaustion and to avoid everything that is utilised within the exer-
trol or even understand. We are not con- cise of freedom, such as emotions, play,
scious of the reasons behind much of what and communication. In the neoliberal
system, freedoms, which by definition
should be freedoms from constrictions,
generate constrictions. The tragedy of psy-
chopolitics is precisely that it deceives the
subject into making a slave of himself.

© ARIANNA MARCHETTI 2020

Arianna Marchetti is a graduate of Cultural
and European Studies. Her main interest is
political philosophy, in particular the ethics of
migration. She’s a translator and a painter.

August/September 2020 Philosophy Now 33

? ?

Q uestion of the Month ?

How Do We Understand

Each Other?

Each answer below receives a book. Apologies to the entrants not included.

Can you conceive of something of which you’ve had no prior is not Wittgenstein but Adam Smith, who in his Theory of Moral
experience ? I cannot imagine any human being capable of Sentiments (1759) argued that fellow feeling is both the cause and
doing so. This is a key to how we understand one another, because the result of humans being social creatures. Shared sentiment is
it exemplifies our reliance upon a pre-existing stimulus for why we can understand what is meant by ‘That’s OK’, and why
thought. And if human thought is founded upon experience (see we’re gladdened when a perfect stranger smiles at us. It can even
for example, David Hume), so too is social interaction. For exam- be the basis of personal morality – as Smith posits with the psy-
ple, if someone informs another that they fancy a sumptuous ban- chological metaphor of ‘the Spectator’ deep inside us – that other
quet (as, dear reader, you often find yourself doing), the receiver self who reminds us before acting that we should ask ourselves if
might conjure up an image based upon past attendance of banquets we could justifiably incite the same feelings of pleasure and pain
or knowledge of the constituent parts. Abstract concepts such as in ourselves as our action would produce in others. Fellow feeling
‘love’ seem to exist in the entities which harbour them, as they are and the Impartial Spectator were, for Smith, the basis for benev-
in many ways incommunicable through experience of the physical olence, cooperation, justice, and understanding. Empathy pro-
world, and are transferable only through language. But in these motes reciprocal altruism, and in that sense is in our self-interest.
ways a conversational understanding is reached – much as Ludwig
Wittgenstein argued in his Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus (1921). TOM MCBRIDE, JANESVILLE, WISCONSIN

However, the more impressive feat is that of emotional under- Can we ever understand another human being? Do we even
standing between individuals, commonly called ‘empathy’. understand ourselves? We can get along with each other by
Although understanding appears to be reached in much the same using a common repertoire of signs: I know in general that we
fashion with emotions – one understands trust because one has sob when we are sad, grunt when disgruntled, smile, chuckle,
trusted, love because one has loved, hatred because one has hated, laugh when happy, as it is what I do myself in similar circum-
just as Aristotle noted – emotional understanding is a quite dis- stances. But signs should not always be taken at face value. A
tinct category. Indeed here the term ‘understanding’ is not baby’s smile is natural – babies don’t have the capacity to deceive.
enough, and must be replaced with ‘insight’ or ‘empathy’, etc. But adults do: think of the smile of a man trying to sell you some-
thing. Laughter too may be false or hollow. Sometimes we want
G.E Moore’s thought concerning the colour yellow supports to persuade not only others but also ourselves that we are happy.
the idea that some experiences are beyond normal language. He
reasoned that one can successfully identify the colour yellow with- So too with words. Take the simple phrase ‘I love you’. We
out being able to provide a meaningful definition of it (or word). know what the words mean generally, but not necessarily what
But one cannot truly comprehend the colour without seeing it. the speaker means by saying them right then. Typically we look
So some form of experience is key to understanding here, too. for extra-linguistic signs, say, by peering into the other’s eyes: if
they flinch away you will be reluctant to believe them.
Through a combination of physical/literal, abstract and emo-
tional understanding, human beings can interact through the We can peer into another’s eyes, but we can’t peer into
shared experience of what it is to be human, or merely to exist. another’s mind. Indeed, we can’t even peer into our own with any
confidence; sometimes we only become aware that we are jealous
NATALIE BORENSTEIN, BIRMINGHAM when someone else points it out to us on the basis of our behaviour.

If you say to me, ‘That’s OK’, you could be praising me, criti- Understanding a human being is not like understanding, say,
cizing me, expressing exasperation with me, encouraging me, a mathematical proof, such that once we have mastered it, there’s
or even saying you’re disgusted with me. How do I understand nothing left over for us to know. To claim that we can read
what you mean? The older Wittgenstein taught us that we do so another person like a book is necessarily false. A person’s identity
by learning how to play particular language games in specific sit- is fluid, imprecise – we change over time and with life-experience.
uations. That’s how we understand what ‘That’s OK’ means in Even in the context of a long-term relationship, our partner will
a given time and place. Is that enough? continue to surprise us. Sometimes we even surprise ourselves.

It isn’t. If I am to understand what you mean by ‘That’s OK’, Notoriously, actors who take on many roles can suffer a loss
I must have not only a socio-linguistic chip, but also an emotional of identity and are at a loss when they have to play themselves.
one. If you are angry, I understand you’re angry via fellow-feel- But not only actors: many people can live their lives without ever
ing, as I too have been angry. If I get that you’re complimenting quite knowing who or what they are. (The present writer is one
me, I understand this because I too have complimented someone. of these people.) The paradigm of intellectual understanding is
I may not agree with your emotional response in a situation inappropriate for humanity. Perhaps the best we can say to our
involving me, but I will never ‘get’ what you mean by otherwise partner is: I don’t understand you any better, but I’ve come to
anodyne words without fellow feeling. appreciate you more.

In some ways the great philosopher of social communication ROGER CALDWELL, WIVENHOE, ESSEX

34 Philosophy Now August/September 2020 How Do We Understand Each Other?

?? ?
Do we understand each other? Some doubt this, given the mis- main means of communication – language. This need is amus-
understandings that can occur. But the fact of identifiable ingly illustrated by two individuals who don’t speak the same lan-
misunderstandings demonstrates that these take place against a guage, when communication becomes a useless exchange of noise.
background of good understandings, in much the same way that
optical illusions do not disprove general accurate perception. However, if a common language were sufficient for understand-
ing each other, then comprehension among citizens speaking the
Let’s take understanding as a given. Why might anyone think same language would be guaranteed. This is clearly not the case.
it impossible? There’s the idea that as mental beings we don’t To aid understanding, language needs to be coupled with some
seem able to get out of our own consciousnesses, and literally put common ground between interlocutors, or similar perceptions of
ourselves into another person’s mind. The very idea seems to be particular situations. In this regard, being part of the same culture
a logical contradiction: your mind is either yours, or not yours becomes helpful for understanding each other, as it can provide a
and you can’t think its thoughts. Wittgenstein’s profound reply common framework and a foundational set of values and principles
to the question of how two people could know they experience to build understanding on. But there are many levels to this. Two
the colour blue in the same way, was, what on earth would it mean individuals can be from the same country, but wide apart when it
to say that they had the same experience? Yet we can understand comes to their socio-economic status or childhood upbringing.
others and feel sympathy for their illnesses, and elation for their This suggests that to enable understanding between individuals it
success. How can this be, given our essential aloneness? is beneficial to have similar past experiences and live in a comparable
environment. This is a scarce condition among humans.
The answer is a perfectly valid (though logically weak) induc-
tive analogy that is so powerful it is confirmed for us every minute Yet this is still not enough, as diverse genetics can lead to dis-
of our lives: we work out what people mean from perceived agreements and misunderstanding. For example, a 2014 study of
behaviour. I cannot feel your pain, but I’m pretty sure you have political beliefs revealed that the development of political attitudes
some when I see you jumping up and down holding your thumb depends approximately 60% on environment and 40% on our
having just accidently hit it hard with a hammer, because that is genes. So to sum up, similar genetics, comparable past experi-
what I do when I hurt. Only a trained philosopher would doubt ences, a shared culture and environment, as well as a common
this for the second it takes tears to well up in the eyes of a child language, are required to have the best chance of understanding
scraping their knee on a paving stone. each other. Is it a surprise then that reaching mutual compre-
hension seems so elusive? So if I failed to make you understand
No doubt Wittgenstein and other philosophers of language my answer, that’s completely understandable.
are correct that we learn to communicate about essentially private
experiences through common languages developed by commu- ALEXANDER CLACKSON, BIRKENHEAD
nities. Our understanding, however, goes beyond words. It is
predicated on our physical similarity, and the analogy that I Understanding begins when I decide to put my existing
believe you’re experiencing something similar to me when you assumptions aside and do my best to grasp your point in
behave the way I do when I have that experience. That behaviour your terms. This involves active listening (or reading), asking
may be an involuntary action or socially learned: either way it is clarifying questions and not jumping to conclusions. With such
the clue that enables us to answer the needs of others as we would a tedious process simply to understand each other, how do we
have them answer ours. ever get anything done? It’s here that assumptions and various
mental shortcuts help us out, and sometimes lead to confusions.
PETER KEEBLE, HARROW, LONDON
I heard someone put very nicely why people struggle to under-
How does a dog get me to play Fetch? We don’t share a com- stand each other: ‘They grew up watching different cartoons.’ The
mon language, and we live only at the periphery of each broader context of social and cultural influence shapes our assump-
other’s culture. He stares at me, he whines and yaps, and kneels tions, values, perceptions. The more we have in common, the big-
at my feet with an increasingly slobbery ball in his mouth. I have ger the chance that our general assumptions about life are similar
to guess: A walk? Dinner time? A treat? It must be trial and error and we’ll more readily and quickly understand each other. We will
to find some sort of behaviour – some coincidence of actions and most likely not even notice because we unreflectively put similar
desires – that gets his point across the gulf between our species. meanings into the same words. This ease of understanding, how-
But it’s not until I react at all that he has managed to communicate; ever, can be deceiving. I can get so used to my assumptions being
and only if I make the correct reaction do we understand each other. the same as those of my friends that I may expect them to be uni-
versal. It is here that I risk running into the trap of misunderstand-
Let’s say that I successfully figure out that it’s time to throw ing. Working in an international environment, I notice this almost
the ball. How much of what the dog communicated was neces- daily. People from different contexts come together and often
sary to achieve this? Was it the whine, the ball, or the expect their understanding of things to be the only one. Misunder-
pheromones in the air that any dog would have picked up on standings are guaranteed.
instantly; something else; or some combination of things? Only
time and animal psychology will tell. It’s worth reminding ourselves from time to time that we all
have assumptions, and they’re often pretty diverse. So, to under-
Next time, the dog will have to recall these actions, or try a dif- stand each other, it pays to put in the conscious effort to establish
ferent combination of tricks; but with perseverance and patience, common ground at the outset of any communication. This may
working together, we will eventually get Fetch down pat. feel cumbersome at the beginning, but think of all that we could
collectively achieve when we truly understand each other.
MICHAEL BARLOW, STRATFORD, ONTARIO
NATALIJA CERA, MUNICH
As many couples, work colleagues, and members of opposing
political factions would testify, understanding each other does Humans are knowing subjects who inhabit both an objective
not always come naturally. Examining the many layers required for and a subjective world. No one else possesses my thoughts
mutual comprehension may explain why this seems to be the case. and feelings (subjective); I also have thoughts and feelings about

The first component needed to understand each other is our

How Do We Understand Each Other? August/September 2020 Philosophy Now 35

?? ?
things outside of myself, such as trees, bees, and faces (objective). pations and stand face to face before another. Having made this
Knowing impersonal facts is one thing, understanding persons crucial turn, the second movement is a ‘beholding’ – the act of
attention per se. Hafiz captures this movement with lapidary bril-
is another. Blaise may live in an earthquake zone (geology), on liance, when he says that it was ‘‘as if she were seeing God’’ – a
a mountain (geography), and have O-negative blood (chem- marvelously compact and expressive image that marks well the
istry). This does not reveal his person. What about the subjective existential depth of this kind of attention. Once again, Hafiz high-
features of Blaise which largely constitute his being? lights the exceptional generosity inhering in this conception of
attention when he says, ‘‘It was hard /to believe the welcome she
First, we can refuse to reduce the subjective to the objective. gave’’. All understanding is a welcoming, an ‘up closeness’.
Blaise is not a collection of material and empirical states, he is a
self-in-the-world the human way of being. Some philosophies try The notion of attention was foundational to the moral philoso-
to eliminate the subjective, saying there are no experiences, but phies of Simone Weil (1909-1943) and Iris Murdoch (1919-1999).
only physical states. Do they think about their own theories? For Weil, attention is ‘‘the rarest and purest form of generosity’’.
For Murdoch, attention expresses ‘‘the idea of a just and loving
Second, we can develop skills to understand other subjects. gaze directed upon an individual reality’’. She believes it to be ‘‘the
We look to axiology, or the study of value: Persons such as Blaise characteristic and proper mark of the moral agent’’.
are worth knowing, and treating appropriately. Their being-in-
the-world is as important as my own. Persons merit attention. The species of attention Weil and Murdoch espouse is exceed-
ingly demanding, for it is grounded in a commitment to ‘read’
Next we look to epistemology. To understand other selves, I others without partiality or preconception, and, in every instance,
must deny myself. As Simone Weil says in Gravity and Grace, to read them ‘differently’. As Weil said, ‘‘Every being cries out
‘‘Attention is the rarest and purest form of generosity’’. A Biblical silently to be read differently.’’ In light of this, she wonders,
proverb teaches that ‘To answer before listening – that is folly and ‘‘Who can flatter himself that he will read aright?’’ But these are
shame.’ To know Blaise, I need to listen to him, and must keep the sturdy and enduring cornerstones of our deepest understand-
quiet. In silence, speech can be heard and feelings can be felt. ing of each other.

Third, knowing others calls for personal narrative. You can- RICK VISSER, LONGMONT, COLORADO
not know someone by quantitative measures, such as IQ. Your
story needs to overlap with theirs by sharing time and place, Long ago, in the cave known as silence
words and silence, smiles and frowns, tears and laughter, regrets Man lived in harmony:
and successes. Then, perhaps, you may know and be known. song-less, muted, free
Only a hand-print on a wall
DR DOUGLAS GROOTHUIS, DENVER SEMINARY, COLORADO Then a distant human call
Would shatter that primal unity.
Ihave found one clear thing in common when it comes to By day he’d pray to earth and sky
understanding people and languages: everydayness. Heed the wisdom of the ancient trees
To learn how to speak Italian I had to live it. Similarily, to At night he’d dance ‘round moon and fire
understand my friends and relations, I need to spend time with Take solace in the infinite seas.
them – not only extraordinary time. like in a class, but time in Gesture would mimic conversation
simple things. Me and my brother had difficulties: we’re both a Silent ritual his only Lord
bit crazy, he is eight years older, and I am in Italy and he is in Collaboration, sweet simplicity
Poland. All those things seem to make mutual understanding Love in the dormant vocal cord.
too far to reach. To begin with the heavy artillery – problems, But the end came in the name of word
suffering we have, situations from our past, etc – is impossible. Sending echoes through that cave
So, we started to play chess together. Wow, after some time it Until man’s world became as thus
started to work. We began to learn about each other, to see how And the soul met a shrieking grave.
we react, what we say, and, finally, we started to learn how to Man lost something upon that hour
respond. We’ve got onto a real, practical way of understanding. Lost intuitive understanding
The human tongue tore man from man
Just as there are too many languages to understand them all, When wordless truth succumbed to speaking.
so it is with people. To try to know everybody will end with Confusion, division, language, war
knowing no one. Secondly, people mean much more than a lan- Born upon that single rasping roar
guage. Thirdly, language is an object, a tool; while people are Until misunderstanding between one and all
subjects, ends, for whom a fundamental respect is needed. Beleaguered man forevermore.

STANISŁAW KSI KIEWICZ, KOZIEGŁOWY, POLAND BIANCA LALEH, TOTNES, DEVON
AUTHOR OF SLEEPING WITH DICTATORS
“She looked upon all who came
The next question is: Does History Progress? If so, to what?
close to her as if she were seeing God. It was
Please give and justify your answer in less than 400 words. The
hard to believe the welcome she gave . . .”
prize is a semi-random book from our book mountain. Subject
– Hafiz, from his poem Recognition
lines should be marked ‘Question of the Month’, and must be
In just three exquisite lines, the Persian poet Hafiz (1315-1390
CE) illuminates with great beauty how humans come to under- received by 12th October 2020. If you want a chance of getting a
stand each other. This involves a two-fold movement of attention
– a ‘turning towards’ and a ‘beholding’ – carried forward in an book, please include your physical address.
atmosphere of presence and regard. The poet brings us imme-
diately into this atmosphere when he says, ‘‘she looked upon all’’.
This act of attention begins when we turn towards another indi-
vidual; when we turn away from our own projects and preoccu-

36 Philosophy Now August/September 2020 How Do We Understand Each Other?

Hello Professor Harman. How did you first dualisms governing the universe. The first is Graham
come to philosophy? the famous OOO distinction between the
‘withdrawn real’ [Kant’s world as it is in Harman
Ironically, but perhaps not surprisingly, my itself, Ed] and the directly accessible sensual
mother saw that I was a philosopher before I realm. The second is the equally important is Distinguished Professor
saw it myself. When I was thirteen or four- gap between objects and their qualities. This of Philosophy at the
teen, a philosophy professor who lived in our second point is often completely ignored by Southern California
town offered a brief class on the subject, my critics, and sometimes even by my Institute of Architecture.
and my mother signed me up for it without allies, but no understanding of OOO is possi- Here he chats with
my asking. It was a fairly standard introduc- ble without paying attention to it. Thiago Pinho about his
tion in which we read Plato’s Apology, Crito, work on the metaphysics
and Phaedo. At that age I saw these What do you keep from Bruno Latour and of objects, which led to
dialogues as little more than boring and his Actor Network Theory, and what do you the development of
pious discussions of virtue, wisdom, and the criticize? Object Oriented Ontology.
like. I wasn’t ready for Plato. At some point in
the next year or two, my mother again Latour is destined for the history books due
signed me up for a night class, taught at our to his recognition of the real structure of
high school by a charismatic teacher on the modernity and the need to overcome it.
Philosophy of Law. That one interested me a Modernity attempts to define reality as two
bit more. We discussed case histories, such and only two pure zones: (1) human beings,
as when two people in a lifeboat ate a third and (2) everything else. This is the bad style of
in order to survive: should they be found modern thought that I call ‘taxonomy’ or
guilty of murder or not? But still I felt no ‘onto-taxonomy’. But Latour’s solution is not
vocation for this sort of thing. But we had a a good one. He ultimately thinks the way to
set of encyclopedias at home – once again get rid of this modern duality is to say that
acquired by my mother, who is a brilliant both the human and the non-human are
person though without much formal educa- present everywhere at all times in a
tion – and I used to read articles in it hybridized mixture. This leads him down the
frequently. One night, at the age of sixteen, I idealist-sounding path of arguing that nothing
decided to read the ‘Philosophy’ article in can exist without the human who assembles
the encyclopedia. From that moment I was it into existence. Consider, for example, his
hooked. What interested me this time was idea that tuberculosis cannot have existed in
the way the article presented the history of Ancient Egypt because it hadn’t been discov-
philosophy as a competing set of radical ered yet. This is why scientists mostly hate
theories about reality. In other words, it was Latour, and most philosophical realists have
my first contact with metaphysics rather little use for him. But his posing of the prob-
than with philosophy as a discourse on lem of modernity is brilliant, and will eventu-
justice or law; and that first taste of meta- ally be seen as a turning point, once we have
physics spoke to me more directly and put the era of onto-taxonomy behind us.
movingly. At heart I am a metaphysician, and
that was the entry into philosophy that I You’re a realist, but not a materialist. How
needed. would you characterise your position?

In 1999 you labelled your approach ‘Object What I usually call myself is a ‘formalist’. I
Oriented Philosophy’. In 2009 Levi Bryant mean this in the medieval and Leibnizian
called it ‘Object Oriented Ontology’ (OOO), sense of ‘substantial forms’ – referring to
a label which stuck. How do you define it? forms hidden in the things themselves rather
than forms abstracted from the things by the
Two features of OOO seem to me most human mind.
important, though as a group we only agree
on the first of them. This first feature is the The problem with materialism is that it
idea of ‘flat ontology’. This means that all ends up being a form of reductionism. Tradi-
objects are equally objects, and above all tional materialism reduces everything to
that human beings are not different in kind particles swerving through the void. This is
from all non-humans, as if the universe an ‘undermining’ method that cannot
were split into two basic types of things. The account for the emergence of new things
second feature of OOO, crucial for me, above the tiniest level. And the more recent
though not found in Bryant, for example, is materialism of Cultural Studies simply means
the notion that there are exactly two that everything is historical, contingent,
formed through social practices, and so

Interview August/September 2020 Philosophy Now 37

forth. This is an upside-down version of My flat ontology – ‘everything is equally an there is nothing to be learned from any
traditional metaphysical materialism, since it object’ – is just a starting point. But meta- place other than the Left? Is it really impos-
reduces objects upwards, to their social physics must begin by not accepting any sible to have a political event that teaches
relations. This makes it vulnerable to the pre-existing clichés about how the world is some moderate or even conservative
critiques any realist philosopher can make. divided up. The most dangerous prejudice in lesson? I’m not so sure. It’s only so if you’re
For example: if something is nothing more this respect, from the medievals all the way willing to take all the failures of the Left and
than its current set of social relations, how up to Kant (1724-1804), was their assump- call them successes. For instance, shouldn’t
should it be able to enter into new relations tion that the Creator and the created are we consider the possibility that the Egyptian
in the future? Everything should be frozen in utterly different in kind. For moderns – and Revolution of 2011 was just such a failure?
place in its current relational network, with that still includes us in the early twenty-first Badiou and Žižek double down in their
nothing moving at all. century – our danger is that we have a support of that revolution, and it was
model with human beings on one side and certainly a stirring event – I was in Egypt
Should we return to Immanuel Kant? everything else on the other. while it happened. But I know many Egyp-
tians who would prefer to return to the days
Immanuel Kant is probably the emblematic In his article ‘The Poverty of Philosophy’ of Mubarak; and before we dismiss them as
modern philosopher; even more so than (2012), Alexander Galloway made a remark wishy-washy conciliators, we ought to look
René Descartes. If we want to go back and about OOO ‘putting humans on the same more closely at what the revolutionaries of
address the point where modern philosophy level as garbage’. What bothers him about Tahrir Square miscalculated.
took the wrong fork in the road, I see no way flat ontology is that he wants some vague
to do it without wrestling directly with Kant, form of political Leftism to provide the I think we learn two key political lessons
rather than just with his heirs – and there are conditions of access to all other philosophy. from Latour, though he is not normally
dozens of important heirs, although Husserl This becomes impossible as soon as OOO viewed as a political philosopher. First,
and Heidegger are my own two favorites. forbids the human from being the sole gate- modern philosophy circles around the ques-
way to philosophy. The fact is, the Left as we tion of the ‘state of nature’ – of whether
The most famous and most influential know it – while better than the Right as we humans are naturally good or evil. With
argument against Kant is that of the German know it – emerged from an era of philosoph- Latour’s shift to considering the political role
Idealists: ‘We can’t think of something outside ical idealism, which is why I suspect it must of inanimate things, it seems to me that
of thought without turning it into a thought; be rethought from the ground up. But more human nature fades in importance. One of
therefore, the thing-in-itself [the world inde- importantly, whatever your political views, the main arguments that conservatives like to
pendent of human perception and thought] flat ontology means that they cannot be hammer home is that human nature has
is a self-contradictory idea.’ The supposedly built into your metaphysics. never changed one bit: that we are a danger-
remorseless logic of this argument actually ous animal; that a thorough knowledge of
rests on an equivocation between two differ- You once wrote that ontology [the study of ancient thought and history will show us how
ent kinds of ‘thought’. Whereas OOO holds being] has nothing to do with politics. What a wiser group of thinkers learned from the
that we can mentally allude to something did you mean? ugliness of human nature to build the needed
outside thought without thinking it in the caution into the polis [Greek city state]; that
sense of literally having mental access to its I’d put it a bit differently, and say there is no attempts to create utopia often lead to hell
qualities, the German Idealist argument immediate short-cut between a philosophy on earth; and so forth. But if human nature is
ignores anything like allusion: either you think and its political ramifications. Consider that no longer the key to the political picture, this
something in the strict sense of the term, or most or all of the greatest philosophers argument is severely weakened. Second,
you’re left with vague gesticulations and have appealed to people on both sides of there has been a tendency on both the Left
mystical hand-waving. No one else seems to the political spectrum. There are Left and and Right – though more on the Left – to
have recognized that this is simply a bad Right Hegelians, Nietzscheans, and Heideg- think that political knowledge is possible:
argument in the form of Meno’s Paradox [“If gerians. Heidegger was a Nazi himself; but knowledge for instance that we were born
we don’t already know what X is, how will we his numerous admirers on the Left include free and were placed in chains by a corrupt
know X when we find it?”]. Herbert Marcuse. And everyone uses Kant. society; or that we are exploited by the capi-
But look at a case such as contemporary talist class for the extraction of surplus
Anyway, the real problem with Kant is not French metaphysician and political philoso- value... If there is one point where we can
the thing-in-itself or finitude, both of which I pher Alain Badiou. I think the jury is still out learn from thoughtful conservatives, it has to
regard as compelling philosophical discover- as to just how important in the history of do with their greater degree of wariness in
ies. The real problem is that Kant thinks that philosophy he will turn out to be. But my the political sphere. There are in fact numer-
the thing-in-itself only haunts human beings, biggest worry about him at present is that ous occasions when simply preserving what
when in fact the withdrawal of reality from his appeal is largely to the political Left, who we have is the wisest goal. We can’t just go
direct access can be found even in brute see him as a powerful theoretical defender around the world shouting about how
causal relations. of their most cherished views. But it seems immoral and unjust it is. Ultimately, politics
to me that there’s something arbitrary and morality are two separate ‘modes of exis-
Some critics say that your approach is too about the fact that Badiou only allows politi- tence’, to cite yet another political insight of
radical because it compares the human being cal events to take some form of ‘the Latour’s.
to an object like any other. How do you communist invariant’. Does he really think
respond to this?

38 Philosophy Now August/September 2020 Interview

Interview

In addition to Bruno Latour, what would there is also the tendency to assume that about people worse than
your main social theory references be? the truest deep thinkers are scientists. Now, I we are’, in which ‘worse’
Would they include Manuel DeLanda? yield to no-one in my admiration for means only that they take
Newton, Lavoisier, Maxwell, Einstein, and objects seriously that we do not,
Yes, DeLanda would certainly appear on the Bohr; but why should I admire them more however higher than us they may be in other
list. I learned a great deal from his A New than Shakespeare, Beethoven, or Picasso? respects.
Philosophy of Society (2006). Although I hear There are cognitive achievements of the
social theorists complain about certain human race that move in a different element In your opinion, what are the most pressing
aspects of it, they keep citing it by the thou- from that of knowledge. questions for us today?
sands, even more than his previous books,
so they must be getting something out of it You have stated that philosophy does not talk For me it is environmental questions rather
after all. about knowledge but rather is a love for than capitalism. The old Soviet Bloc screwed
knowledge, so we have only an indirect up the environment at least as badly as
For my purposes the opening pages of contact with knowledge. How so? Western capitalism, and – like it or not –
the book are key. There, DeLanda makes a we’re going to need some capitalist tools to
distinction that will be crucial in the coming This is analogous to my interest in aesthetics. work our way out of this environmental
years for OOO, though he does not use the Socrates practices philosophia, not episte- crisis. Capitalism appears to be degenerating
terminology I do. He talks about how, even mology or natural science. He asks about the into a plutocratic phase that cannot provide
though human beings are a part of human definitions of things, but never reaches any its own exit. But I’m troubled by how easy it
society, social structures have a reality not definitions that are satisfactory. He pleads is to score moral high ground points these
dependent on the human mind’s conception ignorance, and insists that he has never been days simply by decrying ‘neoliberalism’. I’m
of them. I have taken to calling this the differ- anyone’s teacher. I read these not as ironic afraid that most of the anti-capitalists I’ve
ence between the human being as ‘ingredi- expressions of superiority to the masses, but encountered seem to think they have every-
ent’ and ‘observer’ in any given situation. as a genuine awareness of his own igno- thing figured out, which is always the most
This difference played an important role in rance. Knowledge is great. The human race dangerous situation to be in. Environmental
my recent book Art and Objects (2020), and it needs knowledge in order to survive. But issues at least have the virtue of being some-
will only become more important to my knowledge is not everything. what elusive as well as pressing, which
critique of onto-taxonomy. Above all, it allows means in my eyes that global warming is
us to see what’s wrong with all the hipster- You said once that philosophy needs to be more likely to provoke new thought than an
ism of recent decades about ‘self-reflexivity’: funny. Is this something you learned from already well-established critique of capital-
for a human to think about human society is Bruno Latour and Slavoj Žižek? ism that has simply repeated the same
not ‘self-reflexive’, since the ‘I’ who is part of complaints for more than a century.
society and the ‘I’ who observes and talks Latour and Žižek are certainly funny in a way
about it are in some sense not the same ‘I’. that Heidegger definitely is not. In fact, this What should a young philosopher learn?
was one of the things that most attracted me
You consider the art world central to OOO. to Latour’s work when I first encountered it A lot more than just philosophy. It is impor-
What role does art play in your theory? in 1998. Later Gerard de Vries, the prominent
Dutch Latourian, told me that he had been tant to be open to and curious about any
OOO is suspicious of the scope of all forms drawn to Latour’s work years earlier for
of literalism – of which knowledge is just the exactly the same reason. But humor was other field, including those that might seem
pre-eminent example. important to me as a theoretical topic long
before I first read Latour. Probably the best completely uninteresting to you now. For
Literalism is defined in OOO as that which term paper I wrote at DePaul University was
conflates a thing with the sum total of its an attempt to reconstruct Aristotle’s theory example, I never had the least interest in the
properties – as was the case for David of comedy based on a few hints in his Poet-
Hume, who not only reduced apples to ics. I wrote it very early, probably 1991, at a history of English gardens, until, while
bundles of qualities, he also reduced human time when the first hints of OOO were still
selves to bundles of perceptions. Aesthetic just taking shape. This is probably because researching my architecture book, I discov-
experience, I hold, is the kind of experience what I consider to be my first original philo-
that drives a wedge between objects and sophical insight – which dates to my under- ered their great importance in the history of
their qualities, which in turn also requires graduate years in 1987 – was the realization
the beholder to step in for the ‘object’ side that the definition of intentionality in Husserl aesthetics. They represent the surprising
of this duality, since in artistic experience the and the definition of comedy in Aristotle
object withdraws from view and we have to have a considerable overlap. Intentionality influence of China on the development of
replace it with ourselves. To be more means that in any mental act the mind takes
precise, I am speaking here of the ‘art expe- some object seriously, while comedy is about English aesthetics, which in turn led to
rience’, not ‘aesthetics’ in the OOO sense, observing an agent take something seriously
since aesthetics in OOO refers to a much that we consider to be beneath us in some Romanticism and to Kant’s own aesthetics.
wider object-quality division, which we find sense. This is Aristotle’s idea that ‘comedy is
in our experience of time and even in sheer Just keep your eyes and ears open and you
causal interaction. In the modern period
may suddenly find yourself passionate about

something you previously knew little about. I

always try to remember that in 1987 I barely

knew the first thing about Heidegger, but by

little over a decade later had mastered his

entire written corpus, simply because it

became important to me in a way that it had

not been important previously. PN

• Thiago Pinho is a PhD student in Social
Sciences at the University of Bahia, Brazil.

Interview August/September 2020 Philosophy Now 39

Letters

When inspiration strikes, don’t bottle it up.
Email me at [email protected]
Keep them short and keep them coming!

Beyond Belief Imagine There’s a God and towns. I understand that few police
were actually prosecuted after the war.
DEAR EDITOR: In ‘Beyond Humanism’, Imagine there’s a God, who thought:
Philosophy Now 138, Robert Griffiths sug- ‘‘I will create a universe One final depressing point: the SS,
gests that ‘humanists still need gods so composed of matter that conforms Orpo and Einsatzgruppe had a high num-
they can argue against them’. Humanists to rules of my devising. ber of university graduates compared
have mainly addressed the question of the I’ll light the blue touchpaper, then with other units within the Wehrmacht,
existence of God because of the criticisms step back and watch as it goes “Boom!” and the highest Nazi membership by job
from theists, who argue that a justification and see how things develop. title was among university professors.
or foundation for ethical conduct can Perhaps, in time, something will grow
never come from humankind. However, which can imagine there’s a God.’’ ALAN J. FORD
the central belief of humanists is that LINCOLNSHIRE
humanity is the curator of its own inter- PATRICK O’CALLAGHAN
ests and does not need externally-imposed Our Nietzschean Selves
standards. Perhaps we should listen closer Your Secret is the Truth DEAR EDITOR: In Issue 137, Paul O’Ma-
to the case they make for man being ‘the honey argues that Friedrich Nietzsche
measure of all things’. This side of truth, everything is fuzzy believed that we do not have free will.
Deductive reasoning doesn’t work One of the reasons we might not have
For those who believe that humanistic Most of the time science and the soul free will is that we “cannot possibly be
ethics would result in an unacceptable Get in each other’s way: responsible for who we are, because we
level of moral relativism, there is an The secrets of physics/The duality of man have no say in our makeup.” This did not
argument to be made that a process of Time is relative/The spirit is eternal. strike me as sounding much like Nietzsche.
cultural convergence will even out the But from God’s side things are crystal clear
major differences between different No aberrations or misplaced thoughts. Granted, Nietzsche thinks that factors
moral systems. There is also a case to be He looks in at us and knows exactly why outside of our control have a huge influ-
made that the development of social We understand nothing at all. ence on who we are today. However, I
rules, norms, and codes of behaviour are If only he could explain to us. think an integral part of his philosophy is
an evolutionary response. Such instincts encompassed by his tag-line ‘to become
or intuitions as favouring one’s own kin But truth is in his way. one’s self’ (How to Become What One Is is
or tribe, and the development of a ‘herd COLM SCULLY the subtitle of his autobiographical work,
instinct’ can be argued as the basis for a Ecce Homo). He thinks we are responsible
common general moral instinct which Genocide in Poland for examining those factors we have no
evolved to strengthen social groups. DEAR EDITOR: The article on genocide control over and dismantling them until
by Michael McManus in Issue 138 is full we find what is authentically and truly us.
GRAHAM HACKETT, CARDIFF of inaccuracies. He rightly highlights the For example, in ‘Schopenhauer as Educa-
brave Poles who aided and supported tor’, Nietzsche urges the youthful spirit
DEAR EDITOR: In his article ‘Einstein & the Jewish community in Poland – with- to look at what activities have truly lit up
The Rebbe’ in Issue 138, Dr Ronald out mentioning the fact there were their souls so far, and use these things as
Pies states that there can be no reconcil- problems in Poland with anti-Semitism clues to discovering themselves. So I think
iation between creationists and science prior to the War. Secondly, the death Nietzsche would urge us to find ourselves
concerning the age of the world. Did it squads he discusses were in fact German despite the factors that lie outside of our
take six days or billions of years? Ein- Ordnungspolizei (Orpo) from Hamburg. control, rather than relinquish our con-
stein perhaps himself provided the path Their task was to secure territory the trol and responsibility because of them.
to peace. As every science fiction fan Wehrmacht had captured, ensuring that
knows, if you go up in a suitably fast anti-German elements were persecuted. BETH POLLARD
rocket and return to Earth a month Thirdly, the vast majority of the Orpo CAMBRIDGE
later, many years will have passed on were career police officers; McManus’s
Earth. Similarly, God, working in and idea that they were made up of “labour- DEAR EDITOR: Interesting article in
from eternity, untrammelled by our ers, truck drivers, seamen...” is total Issue 137 by Paul O’Mahoney, ‘Our
restrictive dimensions of time and space, nonsense! They weren’t acting under Nietzschean Future’. According to his
could work so fast that what was to Him compulsion as those members who analysis of Nietzsche’s argument, humans
six days was to us billions of years. couldn’t tolerate being made to act like do not have free will because we are pre-
psychopaths could seek a transfer out. determined to act the way we do. Hence,
RICHARD HEATH, FILEY Some did, and returned to their cities we cannot be blamed for our actions.

40 Philosophy Now l August/September 2020

Letters

Apparently, we are doomed to chaos and enjoys no choices in the sense of being played in their books by fancy. You
disorder because our lives are losing pur- able to change anything. But while her might read them to wind down after a
pose alongside losing God, until our lives ever-recurring path through life may be day of binge-watching movies. Hardly
will becomes nothing more than a game. obvious for Nietzsche’s demon, is it obvi- problematic. The problem starts when
ous for Madge? And if not, does it matter? their tight-fisted fantasy gets political
However – and this is a big however – and is given priority over people really
if humans wish to live within a society, NEIL RICHARDSON struggling.
there must be order within that society. KIRKHEATON
This means establishing rules the partic- While I would not question Ray Shel-
ipants in that society need to follow. Few DEAR EDITOR: Nietzsche’s affirmation of ton’s authority as concerns Ayn Rand in
people would want to live in a society eternal recurrence in the closing passages his Letter to the Editor in Issue 137, I
where their neighbour can murder them of Thus Spake Zarathustra parts 3 and 4 think he plays the same game as many
or steal from them and the perpetrator was made in a state of Dionysian ecstacy. apologists for rightwing nonsense by nit-
be held blameless because they could not He was speaking in his shamanic voice. picking over technical matters that have
help themselves. Rather, a just society When he came down to earth he would nothing to do with the main argument.
will establish laws so that humans are have been no more capable of affirming There’s a big difference between group-
held accountable for their actions, even such a thing than anyone else. (See Ecce ing Rand with Nietzsche and Herbert
if they cannot ultimately be blamed for Homo 3, where he confesses that this Spencer, and claiming her as their direct
them. The perpetrator’s programming mother and his sister were the greatest descendent. Clearly there were differ-
also means they would most likely not be objection to the idea of eternal recur- ences, as Shelton points out; but that
rehabilitated, and so commit crime rence!) Zarathrustra needs to be read hardly dispenses with the overlaps. For
again. So the society only has a few alongside Mircea Eliade’s great work: instance, I don’t doubt that Rand dis-
options: let the perpetrator go and hope Shamanism: Archaic Techniques of Ecstacy. tanced herself from Nietzsche because of
that crime is not committed again; his ‘irrationalism’ – she was, after all, the
imprison them forever; exile the perpe- FRED BURNISTON architect of ‘Objectivism’ (a lot of talk
trator to somewhere they will be unlikely about there being hard facts in the world
to commit crime; or execute them. DEAR EDITOR: Do you suffer a daily in order to make general claims about the
burden, a repetition, doubt with respect world and treat them as if they were hard
My point is that the ultimate chaos to your questions and answers regarding facts). But she certainly shared Niet-
perceived by Nietzsche is improbable. It the illusory reality construct called ‘life’, zsche’s distaste for what he called ‘slave
may exist for a short time, after a war or wherein ‘dignity’ and ‘freedom’ are but morality’, as well as his concept of resen-
other catastrophic event; but soon, soci- social masks worn only to hide an igno- timent (see her The Virtue of Selfishness).
eties would start to re-develop, and an rance of absolute truth with regards to She also shared his propensity for the
attempt at order would likely be estab- meaning? If so, read the Editorial from fanciful and mythic: she preferred the
lished. After all, we cannot have our Issue 137, ‘Nietzsche’s Hammer’, and narratives of heroes, while disdaining
neighbours getting away with murder or scan that issue featuring ‘the Prophet’. narratives about the struggling masses.
theft – even if their lack of free will Yes, life is confusing, but at some point While she may not have shared Spencer’s
makes them blameless when they do so. one must begin again, turn things glee for eliminating the weak, she seemed
around, and address one’s own curiosi- just as indifferent to their suffering. This
BRIAN FRASER ties with one’s own questions. Not just is the slippery slope she shares with Niet-
WINNIPEG for information purposes, but to build a zsche and Spencer in their ‘let the cream
world of clarity with purpose! To test rise to the top and the rest be damned’
DEAR EDITOR: In Brandon Robshaw’s one’s question-and-answer concepts, as approach. There is a reason she is to this
article on eternal repetition, Issue 137, a well as to build all new world constructs day the darling of rightwing libertarians
fourteen line extract from Nietzsche’s upon those very concepts! What was and free market fundamentalists.
The Joyous Science (1882) refers to a life once a ‘nothing’ is now a lifetime adven-
lived now which has been lived. But ture of exploration pleasure. D.E. TARKINGTON
nothing is stated about the future which NEBRASKA
follows the demon’s sudden announce- LEN GALLAGHER
ment of eternal repetition of your life. VAL CARON, ONTARIO Beyond Mathematics
Hence the demon visiting Madge in the
early morning of her thirtieth birthday, DEAR EDITOR: It’s flattering when other DEAR EDITOR: In Issue 137 Owain Grif-
say, for the ninth cycle, would startle her Philosophy Now readers mention my fin discusses numerical infinities. I don’t
as much as the eight previous visits. How- name, and in the last two issues this hap- doubt that the concept of mathematical
ever, once recovered, Madge has the pened twice. For this I should thank infinities is useful for some mathematical
novel freedom to get on with her life. She David Wright from Sacramento and Ray or scientific disciplines. What I do ques-
does not have to meditate furiously over Sheldon from Glendale for their com- tion is, how true is this language? Math-
holidays, boyfriends, debt, or arguments ments on my choice of ‘worst philoso- ematics only exists in our minds.
with parents. Madge may become blessed pher’ in Issue 135. In fact I dismissed Humans have invented a mathematical
with the robust attitude, ‘Am I bovvered?’ Nietzsche as my candidate for worst language that describes the universe; but
Alternatively, the demon’s visit implies philosopher, and awarded that prize to as Korzybski has pointed out, ‘the map is
she persists like an automaton in an Ayn Rand. But one problem I have with not the territory’. A map that has infinite
entirely predictable world where she both Nietzsche and Rand is the role locations between 0 and 1 does not seem

August/September 2020 l Philosophy Now 41

Letters

useful, especially if it describes a territory evades treating it as other than no-thing. way; but replace ‘thought’, which sounds
that only exists in our minds. Derek Parfit comes closest, perhaps, like a thing, with ‘thinking’, which is a
process, and see what happens: “Thinking
NICHOLAS STRAUB to laying the ghost of Nothing to rest . that all thinking is electrochemical activity
He said that if there were nothing at all, in my prefrontal cortex is itself electro-
DEAR EDITOR: I found Les Reid’s article this would still entail the truth that there chemical activity in my prefrontal cortex...”
‘Return to Infinity!’ in Issue 137 very was nothing at all – so, not nothing at all The manifest absurdity has vanished.
interesting. He argued that it may, after (TLS, July 1992). Someone might demur
all, be possible that both space and time that if there were nothing, logic itself This brings me to the second point. In
extend infinitely. I have an argument as would not hold. Does this imply that you the way we use language we (unthinking-
to why that isn’t possible. can’t think about nothing? (And how can ly) speak of thoughts as if they’re things.
you think about no thing? – there’s noth- If thoughts are things then they’re mental
The idea that there are some points sep- ing to think about. You’ve got to think entities and cannot conceivably be physi-
arated by an infinite distance from some about something...) Is the problem of noth- cal entities. One alternative hypothesis is
other points may be rejected as nonsensi- ing just a question of thinking about no that there is no such thing as a thought;
cal. For instance, if a pair of points are an thing; or one of trying to think about a but there is a process – the neural activity
infinite distance apart then nothing can be thing that can’t be thought about? Could we think of as thinking.
further away from one of those points than nothing none the less ‘hold’ in some sort
from the other one. Yet for there to be of supralogical mode – justifying the John Searle refers to the distinction
nothing beyond them, those points must be assertion that there could have ‘been’ between things and processes in his anal-
at the edge of the universe.This would only Absolute Nothing? ogy of water molecules (things) and slip-
be possible if the universe is not infinite. So ping (a process). Tallis seems to think
the idea of a universe which is infinite TONY SAWYER he’s missed the point about things and
because it contains points which are sepa- processes. He’s interpreted Searle’s idea
rated by infinite distance contains a contra- The New Minimalism as a comparison of things seen one way
diction. It follows that the universe must be DEAR EDITOR: I found a parallel of the and things seen another way, and hence
finite in size. ‘least publishable unit’ (LPU) from thinks he can answer it as ‘the scale of
‘Escaping the Academic Coal Mine’, attention’ being different in each case.
Reid argues that the Einsteinian model Issue 137, “that refers to the common-
of a universe that is finite but without place strategy of maximizing your count If consciousness is not ‘merely’ activity
edges may be wrong, in which case, the of academic publications by making each in the brain, what is it? If the answer’s in
universe may actually have edges. But if one contain the smallest possible contri- his latest book, I promise to buy it!
we ask what’s on the other side of the bution to the field needed for it to get
edge of the world, the answer is that published.” There’s the same concept in DAVE MANGNALL
there is no such place. My preceding athletics, which could be called the ‘least WILMSLOW
argument shows that there must be an prizeable performance’ (LPP). It was
end to the extent of points or locations. practiced by top Russian pole vaulter DEAR EDITOR: Panpsychism seems little
Therefore, there could be no locations Sergey Bubka, world record holder more than a re-branding exercise. If con-
beyond that limit. And the principle of between 1983 and 1997. He overcame sciousness is a property of elementary
this argument applies to any dimension, his own world record thirty five times. particles, and that’s all there is to it, then
so it applies to time as well. With this strategy he collected thirty five the planet Jupiter should have a far
important cash prizes – one for every greater consciousness than our kilogram
PETER SPURRIER new world record he attained. of grey mush, since it consists of consid-
HALSTEAD, ESSEX erably more particles. Gaia notwith-
EDUARDO HELGUERA standing, there is no evidence for this, at
DEAR EDITOR: We obviously have prob- BUENOS AIRES least in any way that relates to our expe-
lems with mathematical infinity. I think a rience of being conscious.
comment from Bertrand Russell is appro- Mind: The Gap
priate here: Mathematics may be defined DEAR EDITOR: I do enjoy Raymond What then is the big difference
as the subject in which we never know Tallis’ articles; but when it comes to between a bit of grey mush and a planet?
what we are talking about, nor whether meditating about consciousness, as he Let’s call this difference ‘coherence’. It fol-
what we are saying is true. does in his article ‘Against Neural Phi- lows that the grey mush must have far
losophy of Mind’ in Issue 137, there are more coherence than large quantities of
LARRY CURLEY key issues Prof Tallis does not address. gas giant stuff. Furthermore, give our
HUNTINGDON One is the distinction between things mush a good wallop, or cut off its blood
and processes. The other is the distinc- supply, and it soon ‘decoheres’, no longer
DEAR EDITOR: I read Sophia Gottfried’s tion between the way we use language showing signs of consciousness. But what
essay on Nothing (Issue 136) with interest. and the way things actually are. is this ‘coherence’? And why don’t all
It seems the thought-laws we use do not aggregations of matter become coherent
allow examination of absolute nothing, Taking the first point first: neural in the brain’s way? Replace ‘coherence’
since, similar to an elementary particle, activity is a process. Prof Tallis’ initial with ‘consciousness’, and you’re asking an
simply observing it apparently alters its doubt about the credibility of ‘thoughts identical question. One or other is redun-
nature. So for me, Heidegger’s dictum on being electrochemical activity’ is almost dant. Nurse, pass me my Ockham’s Razor!
Nothing remains the wisest: it simply simply rhetorical when expressed that
nothings. At the cost of meaning, this ANDREW WRIGLEY
SCARBOROUGH

42 Philosophy Now l August/September 2020

IMAGE BY CAROL BELANGER GRAFTON Philosophy Then

Back to the Future

Peter Adamson looks back at ideas of eternal repetition.

In these uncertain times marked by pervading it so as to be physically present time binging on Netflix.
disease and political upheaval, we in every part of it. Our souls, for example, Nietzsche draws more dramatic conse-
naturally wonder about the future are but particularly pure fragments of this
and whether the past as we’ve known divine fire. At the end of time, the cosmos quences than that. In the passage from the
it is irrevocably lost. At such a moment, the will once again be transformed into God – Gay Science I quoted, he goes on to say that
idea that the future actually is the past, and the world ending in fire, not ice. Then contemplation of eternal recurrence
that the past is the future, might seem reas- exactly the same sequence of events will should “change you as you are or perhaps
suring: these events have all happened play out again; and again, and again. crush you.” For him, it forces upon us the
before, and are now repeating, as they have question of whether we would endorse life
repeated an infinite number of times. Each Why must it be the same sequence of as we have lived it, and endorse it infinitely.
of us has lived our life before, and will live events? Because the Stoics were determin- If we do, it will not be because our life
it again: “there will be nothing new in it, ists, believing that the same starting points involved only good things: pleasures and
but every pain and every joy and every will always lead to the same outcomes. happy occasions we would like to enjoy
thought and sigh and everything unutter- Moreover, their God is providential, and over and over. Nietzsche himself was tor-
ably small or great in your life will have to ensures that world history unfolds in the mented by illness and suffering throughout
return to you, all in the same succession best possible way, even if we cannot always his life: but he still aspired to say ‘Yes!’ to
and sequence.” discern the wisdom behind this design. life as an eternally recurring experience. So
even though his friend Lou Salomé told
Those words were written – at least Unbeknownst to the Stoics, the him that the doctrine “had to mean some-
once if not an infinite number of times – philosophers of another contemporary thing horrifying”, Nietzsche thought it
by the most famous exponent of this doc- antique culture were developing similar was possible to respond to the prospect
trine of eternal recurrence, Friedrich Niet- ideas. In India, astronomical and astrolog- with unbounded joy.
zsche (1844-1900) in The Gay Science ical theories were predicated on the
(341). Scholars disagree about whether assumption that the stars’ locations signify This was indeed the attitude taken by
he took it seriously as a cosmological the- events that occur down here on Earth. Nietzsche’s fictional prophet Zarathustra,
ory. He did not really give an argument Since given enough time the stars will whom he described as ‘the teacher of eter-
for it, apart from his endorsement of return to exactly the same configuration, nal recurrence’. The attitude is to embrace
determinism. But determinism gives us the events they signify should match. the world in all its meaninglessness, taking
only the idea of a future made inevitable joy in endlessly repeating lives embedded
by the past, not an endlessly repeating Admittedly this won’t be happening any within a history that has neither narrative
past and future. So even though Niet- time soon. Hindu astronomers calculated structure nor purpose. Zarathustra’s ‘good
zsche called eternal recurrence “the most the length of the world cycle – a single ‘day’ news’ of eternal recurrence is in this
scientific of all possible hypotheses” (Will in the life of the divine Brahm – as 4.32 bil- respect diametrically opposed to the
to Power 55), he had more to say about its lion years, with the cosmos being Christian idea of history, with its arc of Fall
psychological dimension than its cosmo- destroyed at the end of each day. In this and Redemption. Without beginning or
logical dimension. vision, time itself was seen as a destructive end, Nietzsche’s world has nothing to offer
force. But instead of an endlessly, infinitely but its very existence, with suffering
He was also not the first to contemplate recurring cycle, such as the Stoics pro- inevitably mixed in amongst its pleasures.
this rather breathtaking notion, as he him- posed, Brahm would have a natural lifes- As Nietzsche writes in Thus Spake
self noted. He looked back to the ancient pan, with many thousands of those very Zarathustra 4.19: “Have you ever said Yes
Stoics, who were themselves taking inspi- long days. to a single joy? O my friends, then you have
ration from the Presocratic philosopher said Yes too to all woe.” It’s a more daunt-
Heraclitus (c.535-475 BC). In this sort of breathtaking cosmic ing challenge than the comforting story of
vision, it might seem that the concerns of providential order told by the Stoics, but in
Both Heraclitus and the Stoics thought humans would be reduced to trivialities. its way, even more optimistic.
there is a divine force steering the cosmos But in Nietzsche’s hands, the doctrine of
which is fiery in nature. Indeed, the Stoics eternal recurrence was meant to have the © PROF. PETER ADAMSON 2020
taught that the world was once nothing but opposite effect.
a ‘conflagration’, with this fiery God living Peter Adamson is the author of A History of
in splendidly hot isolation. God then con- So what attitude did Nietzsche think we Philosophy Without Any Gaps, Vols 1-5,
tracted to become the cosmos as we see it, should adopt if we did believe that our lives available from OUP. They’re based on his
are repeated an infinity of times? For popular History of Philosophy podcast.
starters, we might choose to spend less

August/September 2020 Philosophy Now 43

Books We get existential as Doug Phillips says you have to keep
punching until the final bell, and Roger Caldwell judges

the soul-bruised life of Søren Kierkegaard.

The Existentialist’s is “becoming your own person” (p.122), Wherever we find ourselves – in the ring, on
Survival Guide though such a project, he acknowledges, is the pitch, the gridiron, classroom, workplace,
by Gordon Marino never easy. It means not only learning how to in our adolescence, or in our senescence – we
stay in the pocket but understanding why we’re will be swung at, hit, knocked down, and
IN ONE OF HIS MORE there in the first place. After all, if, as Tolstoy absolutely schooled in what the poet Elizabeth
forgettable films (I forget remarks in his Confessions, “the only knowledge Bishop calls the art of losing (“it isn’t hard to
which), Woody Allen attainable by man is that life is absolutely master,” she assures us). Which is to say
relays a joke I’ve never meaningless,” then why bother? And if we do everything we’ve ever loved will, in time, go
quite forgotten, though it’s hardly a tickler. bother – as Samuel Beckett says at the close of away from us. But our efforts to self-medicate
A prizefighter is taking a royal beating, his The Unnamable “I can’t go on, I’ll go on” – then or take a powder from such slings and arrows,
nose bloodied, his block about to be knocked how are we to bear our situation of endless while well-intended, are ultimately wrong-
off. At the ringside sits his mother, next to a suffering and uncertainty and absurdity? headed and self-defeating, thinks Marino. If
priest. “Pray for him, Father! Pray for him!” How, in other words, do we contend with our all else in life is contingent, getting ourselves
she pleads. “I’ll pray for him,” replies the “esurient desire for meaning pitched into a pummeled, at least on occasion, is certain.
priest, “but if he can punch it’ll help!” universe devoid of meaning”? (p.133)
Less a joke perhaps than an existential para- The question then is how best to contend
ble, this pugilistic vignette encapsulates the Friedrich Nietzsche believed that if we can with our outrageous fortune, never mind the
bob and weave between faith and self-over- find a why, then any how is possible. For him, heartache, pangs, insolence, spurns, the
coming in The Existentialist’s Survival Guide, the why of life had everything to do with self- returns of our own ghostly pasts, and even the
Gordon Marino’s seven-round rumination on overcoming, with an increase of power, with a proud man’s contumely? Nietzsche – he of
how best to endure life’s hard right hooks. will to power. But a will to power is itself a the imposing mustache and philosophical
A former boxer and current boxing coach, matter of faith, a ‘will to believe’ in William stingers – has an answer for this too: live
as well as a seasoned professor of philosophy James’s phrasing. If, for example, “your life dangerously! “In myriad ways,” writes Marino,
with a taste for all things existential, Marino depended on needing to leap across a chasm,” “Nietzsche emphasizes the urgent impor-
shares with us a ‘Nietzschean exercise’ (p.174) writes Marino (borrowing from James), “you tance of being able to get into the ring with
he uses to train young boxers. He calls it ‘the would be much more likely to make a success- your fears... Rather than shying away from
courage drill’ (p.174) and it’s designed to help ful jump if you believed you could make the our personal bogeymen, Nietzsche bids us to
fighters overcome their fears of getting hit by jump” (p.129). When we fall into despair, embrace the trials that tempt us to call in sick,
conditioning them to stay within striking then, it stems always from a lack of belief in because they are the pathways to becoming
distance of their opponents, a strategy known whom we might be or what we might achieve. who we are” (p.173). Only by way of
as ‘staying in the pocket’ (p.174). The This is a crisis of the self, ranging “from being endurance, of confronting and riding out
metaphor is one heard too in association with ignorant of having a self to refusing to become what’s most difficult, of staying in the pocket,
American football quarterbacks, who, if yourself” (p.69, emphasis mine). of living – in Nietzsche’s word – dangerously,
they’re any good, have also learned to stay is there any hope for us. Only then might we
fearlessly in the pocket, even if it feels coun- As for his own confessed despair, details of become who we are and in so doing achieve
terintuitive. But staying in the pocket, coun- which he shares throughout his book, Marino something like an authentic life.
sels Marino, is a useful and vital strategy for us has found solace and strength in the existen-
all, for the young especially whose rates of tialists – Kierkegaard especially. “At the risk Authentic Existentialist Living
anxiety and depression and suicide are now so of sounding histrionic,” he adds, “there was a
high that a viable defense – in the one-two time in my life when Kierkegaard grabbed me A corollary of Nietzsche’s prescription for
punch of Kierkegaardian faith and Niet- by the shoulder and pulled me back from the ‘becoming who we are’ is Søren
zschean self-overcoming – is critical. crossbeam and rope” (p.3). More than merely Kierkegaard’s notion of the self as what it is
With this two-fisted defense as his guide, a means for assuaging our depression, in the process of becoming. It’s
Marino uses the first half of his book to repur- however, Kierkegaard and other exponents of Kierkegaard, that other 19th century fore-
pose the dark matters of existence – anxiety, the existential tradition – Tolstoy, Nietzsche, father of existentialism, who serves as the
depression, despair, death – into the service of Schopenhauer, Pascal, Camus, Cioran – are real lodestar to Marino’s study. This makes
self-flourishing. In the second half, he summoned to help “keep our moral and spir- sense given that among his professional
addresses topics less frequently associated itual bearings when it feels as though we are roles, Marino is the director of the Hong
with existentialism, but which he believes are going under” (p.31). Yet, as Marino indicates Kierkegaard library at St Olaf College,
also instrumental to eudaimonia or human in a chapter titled ‘Death’, going under is our Minnesota. For Marino, knowing
flourishing: faith, morality, and love. Between ultimate due, if not later then soon. “We can’t Kierkegaard’s work can be a conduit to
these two halves, and central to his book, is a stop what’s coming” as a character says in another, higher kind of life, one of attune-
chapter on authenticity, the upshot of which Cormac McCarthy’s novel No Country for Old ment, of getting a grip on what it means to
Men. And life along the way will depress us be really alive, rather than to walking lock-
plenty with its frequent previews of the dark. step with the living dead.

44 Philosophy Now August/September 2020 Book Reviews

Books

IMAGE © WOODROW COWHER 2020 PLEASE VISIT WOODRAWSPICTURES.COM Jean-Paul Sartre says Kierkegaard, “Whoever has learned to
by Woodrow Cowher be anxious in the right way has learned the
Rooted as it is in phenomenology, exis- ultimate” (p.53). Anxiety – if we really attune
tentialism is above all a philosophy directed ‘Despair’ – all of which are hiding places for ourselves to it, rather than run from it –
toward conscious awareness, toward aware- the facile and self-deceiving happiness which dislodges us from the They, which “ulti-
ness of one’s freedom always to choose, can be heard in the herd’s laughter of unease. mately helps us to secure our identities as
whether it’s choosing how to act or, at the If, as Marino puts it, “you trust that your task authentic individuals separate from the
very least, choosing what to think. For in life is to become an authentic human crowd” (p.48). In this way, writes Marino,
Kierkegaard, it’s also about caring: “No being, then you will know what you should anxiety “helps us to know ourselves. It
matter how hopeless you might feel, truly fear – namely, becoming a vacant-eyed, informs us that we are beings who have
Kierkegaard teaches, you still have a respon- empty suit of an individual” (p.54). choices, who choose ourselves” (p.44). It’s
sibility to reach through the pain and to care only when we’re choosing ourselves, when
for and about others even if you find it hard We have even the choice of how to think we’re writing our own scripts, that we are at
to care about yourself” (p.232). The first step about our moods, whether of fear, anxiety, our most authentic.
then toward living authentically in an inau- or dread. Understood existentially – in the
thentic age (as Marino’s subtitle has it) service of life, that is – such moods indicate To imagine, in contrast, a self as fixed or
involves guarding oneself against falling into not only who we are, but who we might essential or somehow at the core of who we
what Heidegger calls ‘the They’, Nietzsche become. “Kierkegaard’s existential prescrip- are (as when Polonius advises Laertes “to
calls the ‘Herd’ and Kierkegaard calls tion,” writes Marino, “is that we cultivate thine own self be true”) is to risk falling into
these unsettling moods, learn to sit on the ‘bad faith’, Sartre’s designation for those
couch with our fears” (p.53). Why? Because, little or big lies we tell ourselves to let
ourselves off the hook in order to take
ourselves more easily. For Kierkegaard,
remember, there is only the self which is in
the process of becoming. And for Nietzsche
too, our best self is yet unrealized, residing
high above us where the air is thin, and the
climb steep. Getting there won’t be easy.

The Existentialist’s Survival Guide, leav-
ened as it is with memoirish accounts of
Marino’s own pain and suffering, might
have been aptly subtitled – à la Adorno –
Reflections on the Damaged Life. “Clini-
cally speaking,” he tells us at the start, “I am
a card carrying depressive” (p.2). But it’s this
deeply personal dimension that gives testi-
mony to the promise of his subtitle. This
book on how to be authentic is authentically
executed in Marino’s hand and voice. This
voice of authenticity distinguishes his book
from other recent ‘how to’ guides on exis-
tentialism, as well as from the ‘lives of’
approach of Sarah Bakewell’s At the Existen-
tialist Café (2016) and, especially, from
academic studies. In support of his opening
salvo – “I want this to be an honest book”
(p.1) – Marino’s Guide advances with the
understanding that existentialism, a philos-
ophy born of experience, is also a lived
philosophy. “My aim in this book,” he
declares forthrightly, “is to articulate the
life-enhancing insights of the existentialists”
(p.2), one of whom, it’s fair to say, is himself.

© DOUG PHILLIPS 2020

Doug Phillips teaches existential literature and
philosophy at the University of St Thomas in
St Paul, Minnesota.

• The Existentialist’s Survival Guide: How to Live

Authentically in an Inauthentic Age, by Gordon

Marino, HarperOne, 2018, 260 pages, $25.99

Book Reviews August/September 2020 Philosophy Now 45

Books

Philosopher of the Heart year, looking out of his train window on the Romantically, Kierkegaard was a cold
– The Restless Life of way back to Copenhagen from his second fish. There were no women in his life other
Søren Kierkegaard visit to Berlin, pondering (as he was to do than Regine. But his relationship with her,
by Clare Carlisle for the rest of his short life) the significance variously interpreted and endlessly cogi-
of his having broken off his engagement to tated, forms the subject of much of his writ-
SØREN KIERKEGAARD (1813- his beloved Regine Olsen. ings, directly or indirectly. He feels the
1855) famously declared that need to justify himself: “I broke the
while we can only understand The next section begins five years later, engagement for her sake” he writes. Else-
life backwards, we can only live it forwards. with the now accomplished author standing where he declares that, had he the faith, he
If so, it is impossible to understand one’s at a window of the old family house, which would have married her; but had he done
own life, since there is never a point of rest: has just been sold, looking down on the so, “I would never have become myself” –
we are always being hurled into the future square below, remembering his late father, his authorship would not have happened.
until we reach the point of death, by which and his own childhood and youth spent in At the time of the break-up he tells himself
time it is too late. that house. that “I feel more strongly than ever that I
What, though, of understanding someone need my freedom” – a common enough
else’s life? Most biographers work from a posi- In the third section we are a year later, in anxiety, perhaps; but for Kierkegaard the
tion of objectivity, adopting the viewpoint of 1849, with Kierkegaard pondering again the freedom needed involved having a rela-
someone from the outside looking in and purpose of his authorship. Ahead of him are tionship with God. As he sees it, in Chris-
seeing a life as a rounded whole. In her biog- the years of his ‘martyrdom’ when he’s sati- tian love proper, there are always three
raphy of Kierkegaard, Clare Carlisle adopts rized by scurrilous Copenhagen journal The parties, the middle person being God. In
instead the subjective approach, asking, in Corsair, and of his attack on contemporary Works of Love (1847), he tells us that the
effect, what was it like to be Søren Christianity. By the time of his death in love of a young girl can be a hindrance to
Kierkegaard? This is an attempt to be on the 1855, he had become the scourge of the relationship with God. More generally,
inside looking out. We are taken through the established Danish church. friendship and erotic love are “only
principal events of Kierkegaard’s life, as much augmented and refined self-love”. Yet he
as possible through his own eyes, though not Kierkegaard’s relatively brief life is goes on to admit that “erotic love is unde-
in strictly chronological order. This can be marked more by amplitude of thought than niably life’s most happy fortune and friend-
confusing for those who don’t already have variety of incident. His father, a successful ship the greatest temporal good.”
some knowledge of Kierkegaard – for whom businessman, was of peasant stock. When
a more straightforward biography, such as tending sheep in Jutland as a boy, he once A friend of Kierkegaard’s, comforting
Stephen Backhouse’s Kierkegaard (2016), cursed God – a memory that never left him. Regine after the end of the engagement,
might be an easier introduction. But In his last years he was a great reader of theol- observed to her that Kierkegaard’s spirit was
Carlisle’s method brings with it the advantage ogy, and an eager disputant, both with his one “continually preoccupied with itself.” It
of a sense of a life as lived – of vividness and pastor and with his highly intelligent sons, is hard to demur. His voluminous diaries
immediacy. Once Kierkegaard was seen as a another of whom became a bishop. Søren attest to his self-obsession, and sometimes
solitary figure, somehow apart from his time, himself enrolled as a theology student at the to a colossal self-conceit. In his published
only properly appreciated long after his University of Copenhagen, but took a works he practises what he calls ‘indirect
death. Here we see him in the Copenhagen leisurely ten years to complete his degree. communication’, meaning that he speaks
of his day, in a context of railways, stocks and through a variety of pseudonymic personas
shares, the Tivoli Gardens, and in a Danish The young Søren Kierkegaard was an who do not necessarily represent his own
intellectual milieu where the philosophy of aesthete. Carlisle shows him in the unfamil- views. Carlisle notes perceptively that his
Hegel was all the rage (when in his writings iar guise of a romantic enthusiast for nature, use of pseudonyms failed even in his own
Kierkegaard speaks of ‘the system’ it is always visiting the countryside of northern time to conceal his identity, but did help to
Hegel’s to which he is referring). And in fact, Zealand, perceiving its lonely forests and mask his desire for recognition.
Kierkegaard found enthusiastic readers in his lakes in the spirit of contemporary Danish
own time – if not always of the works by which Romantic pantheist poetry. This phase There is certainly something of the actor
we now know him best. Many of these read- didn’t last. When his father died he inher- in him, even something of the drama queen.
ers, Carlisle tells us, were women, who found ited a considerable fortune, became a sort of When satirized in the pages of The Corsair –
that Kierkegaard uniquely addressed them man about town, and got engaged to the its cartoons mockingly depict him as having
both to the heart and from the heart. Carlisle beguiling Regine. This engagement he one trouser-leg longer than the other – he
herself dedicates this book to her mentor, abruptly broke off. His life thereafter was thought of it in terms of martyrdom. “Such
George Pattison, who has done much to put one of thinking and writing. tortures as mine” he declares in his diary,
Kierkegaard back into his historical and “that I should be selected to be a sacrifice.”
specifically Danish context, and to remind us Kierkegaard inhabited a succession of A diary is a private record, of course, but his
that, for all his existentialist credentials, he is apartments in Copenhagen – luxurious at are written with an eye to posterity, and can
essentially a Christian thinker. first; then, as his money began to run out, be tantalizingly inexplicit. For example, he
less grand. When he died in 1855, all his refers several times to a ‘thorn in the flesh’
Looking Back on a Life money gone, his home was little more than that prevents him from having normal rela-
a student flat. His views of Copenhagen tionships, but never specifies what it is. If
Carlisle presents Kierkegaard at three itself are subject to much variation. At one readers don’t find him a likeable man, there
significant moments of his life. We begin in time it is “my beloved capital city and place is no doubt that he has made himself an
1843, when he has just entered his thirtieth of residence”; at others it is “a little cooped- interesting one.
up place, the homeland of nonsense” and he
himself an insufficiently-recognized “genius
in a market-town”.

46 Philosophy Now August/September 2020 Book Reviews

Books

The Scourge of the Church Søren Kierkegaard tianity plausible he makes it less so by stress-
c.1840 by his father, ing the paradoxical nature of the God-man,
Kierkegaard’s influence has been consider- Niels Christian Kierkegaard Jesus Christ.
able. Although others before him, such as
Blaise Pascal, had seen that the lives of most service and social conformity. The Danish In an age of the religious suicide bomber,
people was ‘one of inconstancy, boredom, State Church he saw as merely playing at some of Kierkegaard’s formulations can
and anxiety’, no one else had put the indi- Christianity “in the same sense as a child appear questionable. Carlisle herself says
vidual to the fore in the same way, or asked plays at being a soldier” – that is, by remov- that he can be ‘dangerous as an exemplar’.
with such intensity and persistence the ques- ing the danger. In one of his most famous works, Fear and
tion of how to live as a human being in the Trembling (1843), he discusses at length the
world. In Kierkegaard’s case this was with Previous philosophers had ‘rationalized’ Biblical story of Abraham and Isaac. To
the purpose not of making life easier, but religion. Locke had presented a Christianity some, God’s command to Abraham to sacri-
rather (as he says) of making it more difficult. stripped-down to a minimum of required fice his son Isaac was not simply a test of
beliefs; Kant reduced it to what he saw as its Abraham’s obedience (the command was
Kierkegaard’s existentialist followers, essence in morality; Hegel saw religious rescinded at the last moment) but a
such as Heidegger and Sartre, stressed that ideas as merely stages towards a truth to be command to commit murder – a clear breach
confronting and making choices was neces- completed by philosophy. For Kierkegaard, of human morality. But if it is possible for
sary if we’re to live authentic lives; but for however, the Christian religion was itself the divine commands to take precedence over
them authenticity had become a relationship truth – but one that needs to be appropriated human ethics, then faith is higher than
with oneself – God had fallen out of the by the individual in his ‘inwardness’. This is morality. In which case Abraham, in being
picture. Kierkegaard saw himself as a Chris- the substance of his formula that ‘truth is prepared to sacrifice Isaac – the person he
tian thinker, his task being that of reintro- subjectivity’. Religion is not merely to be loves most in all the world – is what
ducing Christianity to a Christendom that believed, but lived – and lived with passion. Kierkegaard calls ‘a knight of faith’, even
had watered it down into a matter of lip- Faith is seen as a matter of ‘taking risks’ – though in secular terms he should be
and the more risks one takes, for condemned as a would-be murderer.
Kierkegaard, the greater is the faith.
However, against attempts to make Chris- Was Kierkegaard what we would now call
an extremist? In his last writings attacking
Christendom, Kierkegaard describes a soci-
ety that is corrupt and decadent and in oppo-
sition to the laws of God, rather as the
present-day Islamist sees all Western and
most nominally Muslim states. Of course
Kierkegaard was writing in a very different
context than ours; but there is something
chilling in his advocacy of loving God “in
hatred of man, in hatred of oneself . . . in the
most agonizing isolation.” There is also a
sense of his taking things to extremes when
he recommends us not to have children – not
to produce ‘more lost souls’ – since in his
opinion there are enough of them already.

It is not difficult to find passages in his
writings that make one suspect he is some-
what unbalanced. That it is so easy to do so
must make him an untrustworthy guide to
life. It is only fair to say that he has quieter
moments, when he is no longer a fireman
ringing a bell, as he describes himself; where
he gives voice to counterthoughts. In a late
text, For Self-Examination (1851), he is
prepared to admit that not all hard ways lead
to heaven, and that martyrdom can also be
a matter of idolatry and self-delusion.

© ROGER CALDWELL 2020

Roger Caldwell is a writer living in Essex. His
latest collection of poetry, Smoking Opium in
Moscow is published by Shoestring Press.

• Philosopher of the Heart – The Restless Life of

Søren Kierkegaard, by Clare Carlisle, Allen Lane,

2019, 339 pages, £25 hb, ISBN: 780241 283585

Book Reviews August/September 2020 Philosophy Now 47

Film CRIMES AND
MISDEMEANORS

Terri Murray gets to the core of ethics with Socrates

and Woody Allen [CONTAINS PLOT SPOILERS!].

“I remember my father telling me, "The eyes Socrates
of God are on us always." The eyes of God. contemplates
What a phrase to a young boy. What were
God's eyes like? Unimaginably penetrating, justice
intense eyes, I assumed. And I wonder if it
was just a coincidence that I made my
specialty ophthalmology.”

- Judah (in Crimes and Misdemeanors)

“O my friend, why do you who are a citizen
of the great and mighty and wise city of
Athens, care so much about laying up the
greatest amount of money and honor and
reputation, and so little about wisdom and
truth and the greatest improvement of the
soul, which you never regard or heed at all?
Are you not ashamed of this?”

– Socrates (in Plato’s Apology)

Since the mid-Sixties, Woody Allen distinguished from selfishness – which seems view that justice is intrinsically preferable to
has graced our screens with humor- the opposite of an ethical life – must involve injustice. On Glaucon’s view, justice is
ous, quirky films. From his oeuvre of altruism performed from a genuine regard nothing but a social convention that arises
more than sixty movies, one in for one’s fellow human beings. from human weakness and vulnerability:
particular stands out as a philosophical since we can all suffer from injustice, we
masterpiece. Crimes and Misdemeanors was The Greeks make an implicit social contract to be decent
released in 1989, but the question it poses is Yet, it still seems to make sense to ask how towards one another. We only allow these
as old as the hills: whether living an ethical being good benefits us. If there is no benefit constraints on our freedom because we
life is worthwhile in itself. The higher the to being good, then moral rules are know we would stand to suffer even greater
cost of doing the right thing (or avoiding unfounded and would appear altogether losses in their absence. He argues that
doing the wrong thing), the harder the unreasonable. Crimes and Misdemeanors justice is not something practiced for its
choice. Allen addresses this conflict between wrestles with this paradox, in ways redolent own sake, but is something one engages in
egoism and altruism by drawing a realistic of ancient Greek attempts to deal with situ- out of fear and weakness, or prudence. He
character who is forced into a dilemma ations in which there was a conflict between claims that most persons act justly not
between protecting his happiness and repu- moral duty and self-interest. because they think it’s better to do so but
tation through committing an evil deed, or really because they lack the power to act
renouncing the evil deed, knowing that this In Book II of Plato’s Republic, an affluent unjustly with impunity.
will cost him his social status and happiness. Athenian called Glaucon attacks Socrates’

In a sense, even to ask the question ‘Why
should I be moral?’ presupposes an amoral,
self-interested outlook, since asking ‘What’s
in it for me?’ totally negates the idea that
virtue might be its own reward and discounts
any motive other than a selfish one. Intu-
itively it seems that anyone who has to ask
what he will get in return for a good deed is
probably not a virtuous person, since the
question itself presupposes that a self-inter-
ested calculation of reward is the only moti-
vator. If push comes to shove, in a dilemma
between his own interests and the interests
of others, the egoist will always look out for
Number One. An ethical life, if it is to be

48 Philosophy Now l August/September 2020

To illustrate his point, Glaucon tells the justice and fairness are inconsistent with Film
story of Gyges the Lydian, who discovered a nature’s laws, even if Socrates’ previous two
ring with magical powers that allowed him to opponents were ashamed to say so. ordinary perspective, Judah stands to lose
be invisible on command. Possessing the ring everything – his marriage, the love and
gave Gyges the power to commit injustices Against this cynical view, Socrates argues respect of his wife and family, his financial
with complete impunity. He exploited its that power and influence gained by unjust comfort, his hard-earned prestige as a medi-
powers to the full, seducing the queen, killing means would be hollow, for they would not cal professional, and his domestic bliss.
the king and seizing the throne. Glaucon bring true fulfilment to those who possess
concludes his story by claiming that anyone them. The bearer of advantages so gained At the height of his crisis, Judah confides
in possession of such powers would be a fool could never view them as his own achieve- in a close family friend, the rabbi Ben (Sam
not to use them, and that the only reason ments, and, even if he could fool others, Waterston). Ben says he couldn’t live if he
anyone would pretend to disagree with this is would know that they were not deserved. didn’t think there were some sort of a moral
for the appearance of social respectability. While the man whose achievements were structure and genuine forgiveness. He
Given the magic ring, not even the most gained via deception might enjoy material advises Judah to confess the wrong to his
ardent moral idealist would be able to resist rewards and a good reputation, these would wife Miriam (Claire Bloom) and hope for
the temptation to use it to their advantage. only serve to mask an interior disharmony, forgiveness from her. Judah cannot imagine
a sickness of the soul. that Miriam could forgive him, and admits
Socrates takes exception to this outlook that he can’t bear the thought of the conse-
and tries to refute it. He wants to demonstrate The Movie quences for himself, as well as for Miriam’s
that the supreme object of a man’s efforts, in There is no better modern cinematic illus- pride. Eventually Judah’s desperation leads
public and private life, must be the reality of tration of Socrates’ argument than Allen’s him to call his brother Jack (Jerry Orbach),
goodness rather than its mere appearance . Crimes and Misdemeanors. Allen uses the who has a history of dirty business, such as
predicament of Judah Rosenthal (Martin eliminating unwanted nuisances.
Socrates’ main adversaries to this point- Landau), a successful and happily married
of-view were the Sophists. These teachers ophthalmologist, to bring the issues into Like Socrates’ interlocutors Glaucon and
of rhetoric were the ancient Greek counter- focus, offering viewers an opportunity to Callicles, Jack has a hard-nosed approach to
parts to modern-day marketing experts and consider whether or not Socrates is correct. life. He defines real life in terms of sheer
spin-doctors. They specialized in the art of Does injustice pay only hollow rewards? power over others, and real men know how
persuasion, and their aim was to win public Allen revisited these themes again in his to wield it when necessary. The only plane
favour for their client, irrespective of 2005 psychological thriller, Match Point, but of existence he acknowledges is the prag-
whether this was beneficial or harmful. To Crimes and Misdemeanors remains his most matic: the world where forgiveness and
Socrates, their skill consisted largely in elegant and enduring exploration of these ‘justice’ belong to those who have the polit-
“making the worse cause appear the better”. questions first posed in Plato’s dialogues. ical or physical power to dispense them.
Having engaged in a long-term extra-mari- Abstract notions of moral duty or personal
Plato’s Gorgias provides what is probably tal affair, Judah’s somewhat neurotic integrity are irrelevant.
the clearest attempt by Socrates to answer mistress, Dolores (Angelica Houston), has
the Sophists’ opposition of nature and law. grown weary of being sidelined and now In a moment of particularly poignant
Callicles is Socrates’ third and final oppo- wants him to fulfil past promises made to ‘bad faith’, Judah adopts Jack’s outlook to
nent in this dialogue. He refuses to grant her by leaving his wife. From the start of the rationalize his decision to hire a hit man to
Socrates’ premise, that doing wrong is more film we find Judah struggling to keep a lid eliminate his mistress and the threat she
base than suffering wrong. Callicles claims on the situation – calmly at first, then poses to his comfortable lifestyle.
that Socrates has erred in assuming that the desperately – while Dolores persistently
ethical truth is consistent with conventional threatens to expose the affair, as well as However, having gone through with the
social rules. In reality, he says nature’s laws some of Judah’s financial misdeeds. From an murderous deed, Judah is then plagued by
of survival and self-protection are superior guilt. Not convinced by his own rationaliza-
to man-made principles. Laws encoding Judah contemplates tion, he begins to have deep misgivings, even
his predicament to the extent that he questions his atheism.
FILM IMAGES © ORION PICTURES 1989
In a nostalgic reverie, we are transported
back in time to Judah’s childhood memory
of a dinner table conversation between his
father, a rabbi, and his aunt, a cynical teacher
who insists that this world is governed by
‘might makes right’. To bolster her argu-
ment, she cites the Nazi mass murderers who
escaped justice and went on to live contented
lives free of punishment or hardship. Her
brother balks at the suggestion that there is
no over-arching moral authority, and insists

August/September 2020 l Philosophy Now 49

that those who do wrong will pay, whether in Clifford contemplates of a God or something he is then forced to
this life or the next. his whiskey assume that responsibility himself, and then
you have tragedy.” Judah responds that
His appeal is to a metaphysical realm success, Clifford is unemployed, profession- “that’s movies and not reality” – echoing the
beyond the conventions of human laws and ally unsuccessful, and unhappily married. He Callicles’ and Glaucon’s retorts to Socrates,
their imperfect dispensation of justice. Judah escapes from his troubles to the cinema with accusing him of promoting rarified ideals
is left wondering which of his relatives is right, his teenage niece; but is eventually pressured incompatible with the real world.
The answer has huge implications for his own by his wife to take charity from Lester in the
soul (if indeed there is any such thing). For a form of directing a biographical ‘profile’ The film ends with a flashback voiceover
time Judah is consumed by self-doubt, to the documentary about Lester. As Lester pontif- by Professor Levy, the subject of Lester’s
point that he becomes alienated from his icates arrogantly about himself in front of the documentary (who has committed suicide).
family and suffers constant anxiety and camera, Clifford is forced to silently record An existentialist, he explains that we all make
depression. He has saved his reputation and the narcissistic ramblings of this womanizing decisions throughout our lives, large and
his family, but feels hollow. He is with his egomaniac, while Clifford’s own more small: “Man defines himself by the choices he
loved ones but feels absent at a deeper level worthy project about a brilliant but obscure has made. We are, in fact, the sum total of our
because he has become a stranger to himself. philosophy professor remains unfunded choices,” he explains. Events unfold in a
As an escape from his bad conscience, he because it lacks commercial appeal. Never- manner indifferent to human happiness. As
begins to drink unhealthy amounts of alcohol, theless, Clifford continues to pursue this he says this we watch a montage including a
and his once warm and buoyant demeanor is project as a hobby, and also pursues an attrac- clip of Mussolini, reminding us that among
replaced by cantankerous irritability. tive producer from the crew of Lester’s the events over which we have little control
‘profile’, Halley Reed (Mia Farrow). Halley are the machinations of those with power;
Alongside his fear for his soul there is the herself is impressed by the more successful but at the same time, in the light of Professor
equally pressing fear that he will be found Lester, and begins to fall prey to his charms, Levy’s existentialism, we are able to see that
out by the police. But after a time, a drifter much to Clifford’s chagrin. Allen seems to be these too are outcomes of human choices.
with a criminal record is arrested for the suggesting here that another disadvantage Thus the movie ends on a note of hope rather
crime and Judah’s fears of being discovered for the man of integrity is that women prefer than despair, because “it is only us, with our
fade away. He has gotten away with murder. successful men rather than men of moral or capacity to love, that give meaning to the
Allen explores the question of how a man like intellectual substance. Clifford seems to have indifferent universe.”
Judah can live with himself, knowing that he lost everything pleasant in life by being a
has committed a great evil. decent man, while his brother-in-law is a Choose Well, Choose Life
highly-rewarded sell-out who thrives on
Money & Mind producing programming that “deadens the In extreme situations, such as war, individuals
To explore the issue of selfish and unprinci- senses of the American public”. are forced back into the age-old Socratic
pled versus unselfish and principled in more dilemma: whether it is better to suffer evil or
depth, Allen includes a lighter sub-plot that In the final act, Allen brings the two plot to inflict it. One’s choices could be narrowed
runs parallel to the main plot and opposes threads together by having a family wedding to a terrible dichotomy between collabora-
two characters with completely different at which Clifford and Judah find themselves tion with powerful persecutors or dissent and
values and life-goals. On one hand is Judah’s alone in a room and share a quiet chat. Judah victimisation by them. A radio interviewer
brother in-law Clifford (played by Woody covertly ‘confesses’ his crimes to Clifford by once asked German philosopher Hannah
Allen himself), a struggling artist who makes pretending they’re an idea for a movie. The Arendt (1906-1975) about exactly this type of
serious documentaries about philosophical ending of Judah’s ‘film’ sees the murderer situation. Arendt replied that Socrates had
issues. Meanwhile, Clifford’s other brother- reconciled with his deed: after much time has maintained that there was no proof that a
in-law Lester (Alan Alda) is a hugely success- passed, his feelings of guilt abate, and he is man must conduct himself one way or the
ful commercial television producer/director. able to go on with his life as normal. Clifford other. Rather, there’s an existential commit-
While Lester has fame, wealth and romantic mulls this over and responds that he would ment to be made – and the decision one way
change the ending to have the murderer or the other, says Arendt, is based on how we
confess the wrong, because “in the absence choose to live with ourselves. For Socrates,
this meant not acting against his own
conscience or what could be construed as his
‘better nature’. At the core of this existential-
ist vision is a realistic admission that the
universe does not offer us an over-arching
moral order, nor does it protect us. Never-
theless, we are charged with the responsibil-
ity, and the opportunity, to fashion lives for
ourselves that are worthy of the freedom we
uniquely possess.

© TERRI MURRAY 2020

Terri Murray is the author of Feminist Film
Studies: A Teacher’s Guide. With a BFA
degree in Film & Television Studies from New
York University’s Tisch School of the Arts, she
has taught A-Level film studies for over 16 years.

50 Philosophy Now l August/September 2020