Philosophy Now

Letters

gory as humans, we nonetheless main- the sermons from the clergy. By con- Subject to Ethical Criticism
tain, correctly, that it is an evil thing to trast, in the twenty first century we live
torment them for pleasure. Speaking as a in a world where pictures proliferate. DEAR EDITOR: Gary Cox’s discussion of
Christian, I would say an animal, not We read the messages they convey, but Hume’s (alleged) moral subjectivism and
having done anything wrong, is never few of these pictures give us that feeling G.E. Moore’s moral realism in Issue 143
barred from going to Heaven, whereas of delight that can be generated by the was clear and useful. But I was disap-
the human who ill-treated it is. After all, form of the picture. This situation has pointed to find no mention of Derek
in many cases we would regard the wan- spawned craftsmen – we call them Parfit’s more recent attack on subjec-
ton destruction of even inanimate ‘artists’ – who make pictures in which tivism. To say that moral and aesthetic
objects as a crime, or a sin. the form is the primary concern. But no decisions are just a matter of taste sug-
made object can be completely free from gests that the only possible response to a
GUY BLYTHMAN, any message, that is, from associations torturer is to murmur “chacun à son
SHEPPERTON, MIDDLESEX which trigger thoughts in the mind of goût.” Many people – especially
the receiver. This aspect is often missed. economists, for whom progress means
DEAR EDITOR: In John Tamilio III’s oth- getting more of what you thought you
erwise very interesting article in PN 142 An art exhibition of found works by wanted – cite Hume in defence of such a
responding to Peter Singer’s thoughts on ‘R. Mutt’ (Marcel Duchamp), for exam- view. This led Parfit to comment: “As
speciesism and humans’ unethical behav- ple, implies that there may be no ‘works Keynes remarked, many politicians act
ior towards animals, a few major issues of art’ categorically distinct from other in ways that show them to be the slaves
were not discussed. Firstly, the question made objects. Alternatively put, we can of some dead economist. Many
comes up about how an ‘animal’ is view all made objects as ‘works of art’ if economists, we can add, think in ways
defined. Are insects animals? If so, should we dismiss any contextual aspects and that show them to be the slaves of some
we not afford the common mosquito concentrate on their formal properties. dead philosopher.” Hume is probably
(even those carrying malaria) the same Art galleries allow us to do this. Or it the dead philosopher Parfit had in mind;
respect as the larger vertebrates? Indeed, may be that with ‘art’, the formal prop- but this interpretation of Hume as a
why privilege fauna over flora? They are erties are so in harmony with our cogni- moral relativist is open to question. We
all living things. A broader synopsis tive system that we see them before we must distinguish final desires from
would have been helpful. see any purpose. instrumental desires: the desire for a
corkscrew would be an instrumental
VICTOR MOLINARI ROY ANDERSON desire, with the final desire being to
TAMPA, FLORIDA enjoy a glass of wine. Instrumental
DEAR EDITOR: In her article on photog- desires may be irrational – as the desire
Articles of Art raphy in Issue 143, Atika Qasim makes a for a corkscrew would be if the only bot-
DEAR EDITOR: As someone who has couple of mutually contradictory asser- tles to hand are screwtops. But concern-
been teaching art for much of his work- tions. She starts from the assertion that ing final desires, at the end of what he
ing life, I was delighted to find Issue 143 photographers possesses the power to regarded as his finest work, his Enquiry,
devoted to it, but surprised that the sub- ‘define other peoples’ stories’. She then Hume suggests that we can keep asking
ject was seen to be so complex and enig- laments the paternalism of what she calls questions about our desires up to the
matic. May I suggest that a ‘work of art’ ‘the defining mind-set’, based in the idea point where we establish that they
is not a precise concept which can be that, as inhabitants of the privileged reduce pain or bring pleasure: “Ask a
exemplified or defined, but a more nebu- ‘zone of being’, we possess the power to man ‘why he uses exercise’; he will
lous concept which we nevertheless all redefine the people represented, and so answer ‘because he desires to keep his
understand and use freely? For instance, the world, and this is bad. But she later health’. If you then enquire ‘why he
when someone says “Look at that spi- devotes a chunk of her article to explain- desires health’, he will readily reply
der’s web. It’s a work of art” we all know ing how the same inhabitants of the ‘because sickness is painful’. If you push
what they mean. Such declarations seem ‘zone of being’ have a moral responsibil- your enquiries further and desire a rea-
to be triggered by an experience which ity to amplify the voices of their subjects. son ‘why he hates pain’, it is impossible
switches our attention away from any So, privileged ‘zone dwellers’ do have a he can ever give any. This is an ultimate
function the object may have, towards responsibility to change the world after end, and is never referred to any other
the form itself. all. They should, she implies, follow the object.” While Hume regarded the
noble example of the photographer desire for more pleasure and less pain as
Meanwhile, in its time, Giotto’s Louis Hine, who used his work to draw not subject to reason, he still contrasted
Lamentation, which you used as an illus- attention to social ills. His work sympa- the ‘calm passions’ which promote them
tration, was not made as a ‘Work of Art’. thetically portrayed social problems and with violent ones, which may not. In his
It was made as an illustration of a Chris- showed that art could be a force of sub- Treatise, Hume also refers to ‘wants, real
tian event. Giotto was a very fine stantial social reform. So art is only legit- or imaginary’. Unfortunately he does
painter, and such craftsmen were the imate when it is put into the service of not say how to distinguish one from the
only source of pictures at that time. To a social justice; and artists both should and other, but the fact that he makes this
largely illiterate audience, living in a should not assume this responsibility. distinction shows he believed that
world where pictures were a rarity, this desires are not immune to questioning.
painting must have felt magically real, MAJALLI FATAH
and must have considerably enhanced MARSEILLES

August/September 2021 l Philosophy Now 51

Letters

In operational terms, the conclusion of ping... They thought in images. And as a all surprising. It would be interesting to
Hume’s analysis is absolutely in line with painter, I do not say to myself, ‘Shall I put know if behind these undoubtedly great
Parfit’s conclusion that “Everyone ought the pink next to the green?’ I put it there men were some great women who may
to follow the principles whose being uni- in my imagination and see whether it will be due some credit; and to explore how
versal laws would make things go best, do. Besides, many colours and shapes have the growing influence of a range of gen-
because these are the only principles no name and can only be demonstrated. ders is impacting modern philosophy,
whose being universal laws everyone Ask a dancer to think of their work and and perhaps changing how we view his-
could rationally will.” The main differ- they will show you, or else struggle to torical philosophy.
ence is that for Parfit it is reason that tells explain with abstract diagrams. A com-
us to follow these principles, while for poser does not say to himself, ‘I’ll have a I don’t have a problem with men per
Hume the passions are not subject to rea- diminuendo here’: he listens in imagina- se. I am one. But one who was mostly
son. It must also be admitted that Hume tion to the music getting quieter, and if he raised by two women, which I believe has
gives less thought than Parfit to the ques- likes it, writes it down. Try explaining to a made me realise the vital importance of
tion of how we balance the pleasure and somebody who has never seen it, without women. Indeed, I believe the imbalances
pain of ourselves and our loved ones demonstrations, the bowling action of the as a result of masculine dominance that
against that of strangers. That was what cricketer. And the image of the Ouroboros we see perpetuated across our world may
Moore’s predecessor Henry Sidgwick that suggested to August Kekulé the ben- in fact be the key driver behind many of
regarded as ‘the insoluble problem’, and zene ring is not the only example of an our greatest problems.
the one that Moore tried to resolve – in a image which solved a scientific problem.
way that has not stood the test of time. There is an almost equal gender split
Thinking, it seems to me, is creating in the global population, so for something
CHARLES YOUNG an imaginary world out of the raw mate- as important as plumbing the fundamen-
OXFORD rials supplied by our senses. But the tal nature of knowledge and reality, it
model of the world we create from this is seems self-evident that the discipline
Thinking about Tallis all we have. There must be a reality, as needs to have gender balance at its core.
there is in the guts of a computer; but
DEAR EDITOR: Whilst reading Raymond what we experience is analogous to the ANDREW BIRLEY
Tallis in PN 143, I am thinking what to icons on the screen. This model is so
have for lunch. If I have understood him, well made, so often updated, that it is a No Microbe Rights Now!
he would expect a discussion to be going reliable world for me to live in. Planning DEAR EDITOR: In the News of Issue 143,
on in my head – something like this: for tomorrow, I experiment with details Anja Steinbauer asks the question: ‘Do
‘Shall I have an ordinary meal or some- before committing myself. It is a full sen- Martian Microbes Have Rights?’.
thing more fancy?... Ordinary, it takes sory world, but it is imagined. So, think Answer, ‘No’, for two key reasons: They
less time. There is bacon in the fridge, about going for a walk, and all the sensa- are not sentient, and have no legal status.
and tomatoes and mushrooms. Shall I fry tions of walking go with you, albeit less
the egg or boil it? Boiled egg doesn’t go vividly. Language and other abstractions ANDREW J. LEWIS
well with fried bacon...’ But what actu- enhance the model enormously, but on CHELMSFORD
ally happens is that I feel the cool handle their own they are mere patterns.
of the fridge door, I pick up the bacon, Cynical Remarks
smell it, look around and see tomatoes TOM CHAMBERLAIN DEAR EDITOR: Stephen Anderson’s
and mushrooms. I hear the sound as I NEWARK review of Lindsay and Pluckrose’s Cynical
slice them on my chopping board. The Theories (Issue 143) lays out clearly the
knife is a pleasure to hold, heavy, a razor More Women Philosophers Now! object of the authors’ ire as being the
edge, a present from my son, who loves mish-mash of ideas corralled under the
tools. I see the bacon curl in the pan, DEAR EDITOR: I sat down with my first term ‘Critical Theory’, which subse-
hear it sizzle, the delicious smell. I see copy – ‘Time, Identity & Free Will’ quently emerged as Postmodern Theory.
the egg, crispy round the edges. I have (Issue 142) – and just a few moments Anderson also rightly challenges the
not spoken, or even thought, a word. later I realised that two hours had flown assumption that the liberal alternative
by. The irony of that did not escape me. offered by the authors is unproblematic.
Intellectuals such as Tallis and me risk But he errs in attributing the dictum
bewitchment by language; but Bryan However, when I turned to ‘Homo ‘incredulity towards metanarratives’ to
Magee, in the very book Tallis quotes, informaticus’ by Luc de Brabandere and Jacques Lacan. The term originates not
remarks how rarely thought is verbal. A gazed at the wonderful drawing by Car- with Lacan, but with Jean-Francois
few times I have done a small experiment toonbase, I felt a familiar sinking feeling. Lyotard in the Introduction to his The
with groups, asking them to think for a Every single one of the featured philoso- Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowl-
couple of minutes about what they’ll do phers was a man – and usually, I think, a edge (1984) This report was written for
after the meeting. Then I ask them what white Western man. I had a similar feel- the Conseil des Universites of the Quebec
has been going on in their heads. Only ing when I was training as a counsellor in government, where he states that: “I
rarely did anyone have an internal discus- 2018: each of the counsellors that were define [the] postmodern as incredulity
sion. Usually, they saw themselves doing referred to in terms of the foundations of towards metanarratives” (p.xxiv).
something: catching a bus, going shop- counselling were white Western men.
This is undoubtedly troubling, but not at ALAN R. HOW
WORCESTER

52 Philosophy Now l August/September 2021

IMAGE BY CAROL BELANGER GRAFTON Philosophy Then

Existentialism Comes to Iran

Peter Adamson and Hanif Amin Beidokhti
on Persian cross-cultural interpretations.

We live in a time when academics known in Latin as Avicenna (d.1037). He als, some of whom thought that adr
had
and students in Europe and was himself a creative adapter of ideas from anticipated both Sartre and Heidegger.
North America are increas- European philosophers, especially of Aris- adr
had shown a way out of the substance-
ingly interested in ‘non-Western’ philo- totle. One idea that he added to Aristotle centered metaphysics that had dominated
sophical traditions, like those of Africa, was a distinction between ‘essence’ and Western philosophy ever since Aristotle.
China, India, and the Islamic world. The ‘existence’. He gave the example of a trian- As Mo ahhar notes in the above quote, a
Western academy is thereby, however gle. Just by thinking about the nature of a metaphysics centered on dynamic, con-
belatedly, returning a compliment, since triangle, we can know that it essentially has stantly changing existence bears similarity
European philosophical traditions have three sides: if it doesn’t have three sides it’s to the existentialist notion that human exis-
long been of interest in other cultures. In not a triangle. But we can’t thereby know tence is fluidly shaped by human will:
the Islamic world, philosophy first devel- that a triangle exists. For a triangle, or adr
’s fluid metaphysics, with no fixed
oped in part through the translation of indeed anything other than God Himself essences, seems likewise to offer
ancient Greek works into Arabic. A millen- (the ‘Necessary Existent’), existence must unbounded possibility for self-definition.
nium later, in the late nineteenth century, come from an external cause, such as the As Mo ahhar writes, “humans have no
the last decades of the Ottoman Empire geometer who draws it on a chalkboard. fixed nature on their own.”
saw Turkish intellectuals engaging with
figures such as Darwin, Durkheim, and This distinction provoked centuries of The existentialists’ emphasis on free-
Comte. An even more recent encounter dispute, with some philosophers reckon- dom resonated with other features of Per-
with European philosophy took place in ing that objects outside the mind have sian philosophy too. Sh ite thinkers had
Iran. Thanks in part to translations into essence as well as existence, while others long rejected the determinism of some
Persian, several philosophical movements doubted this. For them, the distinction is Islamic theological schools, insisting that
from Europe came to the attention of Ira- only a conceptual one: outside the mind both divine and human will play a role in
nian thinkers in the twentieth century. there is just the triangle on the board, but human actions. Mo ahhar suggested that
One of them was existentialism. we can think about it from two different European existentialism goes too far in the
points of view – in terms of its being trian- direction of denying determinism. The
Philosophers in Iran had a special rea- gular (essence) or in terms of its having desperate, radical freedom described by
son to be interested in the ideas of authors reality (existence). Sartre sounded to him more like the idea
like Sartre and Heidegger, namely the res- that God fully ‘delegates’ action to humans
onance between existentialism and the adr
took a new and rather surprising and stays out of the picture entirely,
‘philosophy of existence’ that has been so approach to the question. He said that out- whereas in truth humans cooperate with
central in the Persian tradition. The major side the mind there is only existence God to make things happen.
Iranian philosopher Morta
Mo ahhar (wuj
d), which flows out from God and
(d.1979) commented that “the assertion manifests itself in different degrees, like As this example shows, Iranian authors
that the human, as compared to other exis- light emanating from a source and show- did not simply conflate French and Ger-
tents, has the characteristic of not having a ing itself in various intensities. We invoke man existentialism with the intellectual
determinate nature and that they them- ‘essences’ to differentiate things from one heritage of their own culture. They were
selves make their own natures - which is another – this thing is a triangle, that one is instead interested in what is often called
called ‘existentialism’ or ‘precedence of a square – but these static categories are ‘comparative philosophy’, juxtaposing
existence over essence’ - has been demon- only concepts that we use to divide up exis- intellectual traditions of different prove-
strated on much firmer grounds in our own tence, which is continuous, and continu- nance in order to gain insights into one or
philosophy and particularly in the philoso- ally changing. The essences themselves the other tradition (or both). This is among
phy of Mull
adr
, though in a different have no reality outside of the human mind. the things that Western philosophy can
terminology and via a different method. learn from other philosophical cultures. As
Obviously adr
’s philosophy had a very it turns out, well before our current era of
Mo ahhar refers to the greatest different background and intent from the decolonialization and debates over broad-
philosopher of early modern Iran, Mull
existentialists. Among other things, adr
ening the curriculum, these other cultures
adr
(d.1640). While duly admitting a dif- was not primarily concerned with the exis- were open to ideas that came from abroad.
ference of approach, he connects existen- tential situation of the individual human, as
tialism to adr
’s theory of the priority of the Western existentialists were. His © PROF. PETER ADAMSON 2021
existence (i
lat al-wuj
d). But to under- account applies equally to all existents. Still,
stand this, we need to go back still further, after Sartre was translated by the surrealist Peter Adamson is Professor of Philosophy at
to another Persian philosopher: Ibn S n
, author
deq Hed
yat (d.1951), his works the LMU in Munich, where Hanif Amin
won a following among Iranian intellectu- Beidokhti is currently a postdoctoral fellow
funded by the Fritz Thyssen Stiftung.

August/September 2021 Philosophy Now 53

Books This issue Stuart Jeffries considers the moral implica-
tions of a (possible) lack of free will, Dan Ray asks why
drugs cannot be a part of good sport, and Amber Edwards
surveys the position of women under socialism.

Just Deserts: they get as the result of their poor choices. goodness,” Dennett writes, “we aren’t
Debating Free Will That kind of desert is understandably controlled by such agents, and we aren’t
by Daniel C. Dennett & controlled by ‘our past’ either, whether it was
Gregg D. Caruso unacceptable to Gregg Caruso, a New York benign or malign.” We’re not Elizabeths, but
philosophy professor, who is also co-direc- more like Ricky Skaggs, who once sang “I can’t
IN 1929 ALBERT EINSTEIN tor of Aberdeen University Law School’s control the wind, but I can adjust the sails.”
told a reporter that he was fabulous-sounding ‘Justice Without Retri-
not responsible for the general theory of bution Network’. As that name suggests, he Dennett, the compatibilist, tells a story of
relativity or any of his other scientific believes that our penal systems unjustly exact how we become morally responsible. We
accomplishments: “I claim credit for noth- retribution for offenders’ crimes. Not only were born into bodies and societies we didn’t
ing. Everything is determined, the begin- is this unjust because no one deserves choose, and get – if you’ll excuse the ugly
ning as well as the end, by forces over which punishment, he thinks – since no one has term he uses – enculturated. For Dennett,
we have no control” (Saturday Evening Post, chosen their actions; it is also hopeless for societies are like clubs that have rules, and as
1929). This wasn’t just the charming creating a good society because it is entirely we grow up from morally incompetent
modesty of a genius pooh-poohing praise. backward-looking, based on righting old infants to autonomous adulthood, our task
Einstein really was a sceptic about free will, wrongs and exacting futile revenge. Many of is to join what he calls ‘the Moral Agents
who believed that we are not responsible for the alarmingly large numbers of African- Club’ – a social construction that holds soci-
what we do. He agreed with Arthur Americans from deprived backgrounds in ety together and justifies the blame game.
Schopenhauer, who wrote: “We can do what American jails are, on Caruso’s account, That game is justified, he thinks, because it
we wish but wish what we must.” doubly wronged: first they were dealt a poor “presupposes that normal people are capable
The ramifications of determinism are set of cards, and then they were brutalised in of taking responsibility for controlling
devastating for how we live. If everything is jail. Such punishment – indeed any punish- themselves and preventing others from
predetermined and we don’t have free will, ment – is unjustifiable. Imagine, Caruso turning them into puppets – which is the
we can’t be held responsible for anything. If suggests, that evil neuroscientists put an only variety of free will worth wanting.”
our choices are, for example, made by a brain implant in Elizabeth’s brain to manipulate Those who aren’t morally normal or who are
whose activities we don’t choose, we can’t her into killing Donald. She can’t be held in extremis – bears, lunatics, babies, Eliza-
legitimately praise or blame each other. responsible for the resulting murder. Yet for beths controlled by evil neuroscientists –
Freedom is a farce, the penal system a joke, Caruso we are all Elizabeths. We are all aren’t punished, and those who are serve jail
and Rousseau was only half-right when he manipulated by forces beyond our control. time chiefly because they broke the Moral
stated that man is born free but is everywhere Agents Club rules and need to be seen to be
in chains. We were in chains from the start. Nonsense, retorts Daniel Dennett. punished to deter others. Dennett agrees
In Just Deserts, two leading American Controlling human beings is very difficult, with Caruso that retributive justice is no
philosophers go toe-to-toe over 206 pages except in philosophers’ thought experiments. justice at all, but doesn’t accept that that
on a subject that’s formed the basis of a If it were routinely possible to control peoples’ means we cannot punish, praise, or blame.
million undergraduate philosophy essays. choices, we would have no free will: “But, thank
One of the debaters is a free will sceptic like MINORITY REPORT POSTER © 2OTH CENTURY FOX 2002
Einstein, the other a ‘compatibilist’ who Are you
believes that free will and moral responsibil-
ity can be reconciled with determinism. free to
The book’s appeal is more than academic.
If free will scepticism is true, prisons incar- choose
cerate the necessarily innocent, elections are
a masquerade predicated on the absurd your
notion that we freely choose our politicians,
and the ‘American Dream’ – whereby actions?
anyone can become rich, and those who do
deserve their fortunes, while those who
don’t have only themselves to blame – is a
lie. However, if we do have free will, then
the possible corollaries are just as terrible.
We may have no obligation to help the poor,
the obese, the refugees, the homeless or the
unemployed. Perhaps they all deserve what

54 Philosophy Now August/September 2021 Book Reviews

Books

We haven’t yet got the technology of Minor- Good Sport involved in cases like Armstrong’s. He has
ity Report, so we can’t bump off people just by Thomas H. Murray heard all the arguments that coaches,
because they have the dispositions to commit athletes, doctors, and other pundits have
future crimes. Instead, social norms, laws, IN A 2001 NIKE AD THAT concocted to defend the use of PEDs in
and rules, if they are any good to us, help aired a dozen years before sport or to accentuate the futility of regulat-
deter crimes. At least, they should. Dennett he admitted to using ing them. In Good Sport, he peels back the
heartily agrees with Caruso that current performance-enhancing drugs, the cyclist oft-tempting veneer of these arguments
punishment, particularily in the US, is Lance Armstrong calmly sits inside the eye while repeatedly underscoring a few central
calamitously inept at reducing the future of a media storm. TV cameras, shouting ideals that all sport aficionados embrace,
incidence of crimes. Rather, the prison reporters, and flashbulb lights tightly encir- even if only subconsciously. Specifically,
system is a machine for training criminals. cle him, while a doctor cautiously removes a Murray tells us that sport showcases “excel-
vial of blood from his strong, lean arm. lent performance as the product of natural
Caruso, by contrast, argues that our exist- “Everybody wants to know what I’m on,” talents”; “the dedication required to perfect
ing institutions are beyond reform because Armstrong says, before pompously declar- those talents”; and “the courage to perform
they are too mired in notions of desert and ing, “What am I on? I’m on my bike six hours under pressure” (p.149). Innate ability, hard
retribution, He proposes an alternative which a day busting my arse. What are you on?” work, and guts: this constitutes the triad of
he calls ‘the Public Health Quarantine Anyone watching that commercial on human properties on display in any sport,
Model’. This holds that just as carriers of YouTube today, almost a decade after an according to Murray, and audiences want to
dangerous diseases are quarantined even Armstrong-centred doping scandal nearly see competitions in which some combina-
though they’re not necessarily responsible for destroyed professional cycling, likely feels a tion of them is decisive.
getting infected, a dangerous criminal, tinge of disgust or even anger at his words.
though not responsible for his crimes, can be Indeed, the name ‘Lance Armstrong’ has Murray points out that referees, govern-
justifiably detained to prevent further crimes. grown synonymous with cheating and ing bodies, and even fans of sport, work to
hypocrisy in sport. The dominant view today, eliminate all other factors that might creep
Hopeless, snaps back Dennett. What’s even among people who don’t care a wit about into that formula by drafting myriad rules
the point of ‘quarantining’ a tax evader or cycling, seems to be that his accomplishments and bylaws. The peculiar distance between
embezzler? Better jail them for flouting the – including seven Tour de France titles – were the pitcher’s rubber and home plate in base-
rules of the Moral Agents Club. unearned, or at least unfairly gained. ball – 60 feet 6 inches – is just one example
But are such views justified? What’s wrong, Murray uses to illustrate the idea that rules
It’s a scintillating exchange – just the kind after all, with an athlete applying perfor- in sport “create a tension, a real contest”
of nuanced back and forth that would give mance-enhancing drugs (PEDs) to his or her between competitors (p.51). Move the
anyone innocent of philosophers an idea of own body to reach otherwise unattainable pitcher just a few steps closer to the plate,
what they get up to in their ivory towers. By heights? Aren’t PEDs just an extension of the and the batter will miss every time; move
the end of the book, neither has convinced the advanced technologies and training tech- him a few steps farther back, and almost
other they’re wrong. “Your position, Dan, is niques that top-flight athletes already employ? every pitch will be knocked into a gap. Base-
like wrestling an eel,” writes Caruso: “Every These are a few of the questions that Thomas ball fans don’t want the pitcher to win just
time I have a grip on it, or think I do, it slips H. Murray considers in his lively and illumi- because he’s the pitcher. They want the
out of my hands.” Dennett, perhaps cross at nating book Good Sport: Why Our Games pitcher’s skills closely balanced against the
being compared to an eel, concludes sniffily: Matter – and How Doping Undermines Them. batter’s so that the skills themselves decide
“I’m disappointed that I haven’t been able to Murray, an ethicist who has served as the outcome. Such rules, which abound in
explain to you my rather straightforward and chair of the Ethical Issues Review Panel for sport, from weight categories in boxing to
detailed proposal.” But this is to be expected. the World Anti-Doping Agency, is well gender designations in the 800-meter run,
If philosophers agreed, we wouldn’t need so acquainted with the ethical grey areas may seem arbitrary, but, on closer examina-
many. What is unexpected is that Caruso and tion, reflect sport’s core values.
Dennett have set up a website giving readers
a chance to vote on who is more convincing: Lance Armstrong
debatingfreewill.com. “I will be very interested
to learn ‘who wins’ from the readers,” tweeted on a bike, on a hill,
Dennett. But that may well prove nothing.
After all, if Einstein was right, we don’t freely on amphetimines?
choose anything, least of all how we vote.
ARMSTRONG © FILIP BOSSUYT 2009
© STUART JEFFRIES 2021

Stuart Jeffries is is a freelance journalist writ-
ing mostly for the Guardian and the Specta-
tor. His books include Grand Hotel Abyss:
The Lives of the Frankfurt School (2016)
and Everything, all the Time, Everywhere:
How we became Piste-Modern, which will
be published by Verso in October.

• Just Deserts: Debating Free Will, Daniel C.
Dennett and Gregg D. Caruso, Polity, 2021, £12.99
pb, 200 pages, ISBN: 150954576X

Book Reviews August/September 2021 Philosophy Now 55

Books

ARMSTRONG © TABITHA M. MANS 2007 Murray observes that rules surrounding ad: “This is my body. And I can do whatever how this commodification could be reduced
the use of technologies, including the use of I want to it. I can push it, study it, tweak it.” by applying some key socialist ideas. She
performance-enhancing drugs, are of the But fans turned on Armstrong because his references case studies from former Eastern
same character: messy, and, at first blush, pharmacological tweaks were so potent that European socialist states such as Albania,
completely arbitrary. Why do modern pole- they mattered more than his talent or how Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, East Germany,
vaulters, for example, get to use fiberglass many hours he laboured on his bike. Hungary, Poland, Romania, the Soviet
poles over the bamboo or cedar ones they Union and Yugoslavia. She then argues that
once used? Fiberglass poles allow vaulters to Some drugs are decisive, others are not, under capitalism the economic indepen-
clear heights that would have been unimag- and still others have less certain effects. The dence of women is insecure, and that in the
inable with the previous materials. How are magnitude of the effect is what matters. Using absence of security the freedom to make
such radical changes permitted or even this fragile litmus test to permit or ban a drug personal choices is eroded. This is further
embraced by fans and governing bodies, is not clean or simple – grey areas abound. complicated by the fact that women tend to
while others are ridiculed and outlawed? But Murray encourages us to work in these earn less than men do, encouraging the patri-
grey areas: “This is not the kind of problem archal notion that women are best placed
Lance that can be solved once and for all; rather, it’s within the domestic sphere. This can trap
Armstrong an enduring tension we must continue to women in undesirable relationships and
holds his monitor attentively” (p.144). To see human create toxic power dynamics within the
hands up gifts, human commitment, and human hero- family, and affords women specifically very
ics staged at the highest levels, we have no little freedom to leave, with no source of
As Murray explains, “Rules in sport have choice but to contend with doping. income independent of their spouse, and no
an essential function: to select from among means to maintain the skill set required to
the myriad differences among players the © DAN RAY 2021 find work within the modern economy.
ones that should affect outcomes” (p.51). So Women are then indebted to their men, and
sports are designed to cancel out the vari- Dan Ray is a science writer, philosophy reader, expected to repay them in sexual and/or
ables that spectators and participants don’t and PED-free hobby jogger based in Burlington, household and childrearing activities which
think should decide the result. Doing so Vermont. go completely unrecognised by the market.
isolates talent, dedication, and guts, and puts
them on display. Pole vaulters today would • Good Sport: Why Our Games Matter – and These pressures can render a woman
obliterate the pole vaulters of the 1960s worthless in a capitalist society as anything
based on the technology alone. Yet this same How Doping Undermines Them, Thomas H. other than a source of future labourers.
technology produces a modern competition Ghodsee argues that this was not the case in
with a highly visible differentiation between Murray, 2018, $29.95 hb, Oxford University Press, at least some socialist states such as East
those who are excellent versus those who are Germany, Hungary, and Poland, where inti-
merely very good and arguably this 195 pages, ISBD: 9780190687984 mate relationships were free from economic
improves the sport. However, performance- dependence because women had their own
enhancing drugs, Murray says, elevate other Why Women Have Better sources of income and access to social
values, such as access to high-priced medi- Sex Under Socialism welfare, thus eliminating the necessity of
cations or a willingness to experiment with by Kristen R. Ghodsee marrying for money or social support.
drug cocktails, into the realm of the decisive,
and so are not good sport (p.141). WHY WOMEN HAVE BETTER The book sets out to show that capitalism’s
Sex Under Socialism is a short harms are universal and have a profound effect
Murray reminds us that some commen- and snappy discussion of on women. Ghodsee does advocate a socialist
tators have characterized Lance how the quality of women’s lives could be society, but doesn’t naïvely imagine socialist
Armstrong’s doping as “a vision of sports in improved if society were rebuilt on some of states as perfect utopias. She acknowledges
which the object of competition is to use the principles underpinning state socialism. that no Eastern Bloc state ever achieved full
science, intelligence, and sheer will to Kristen Ghodsee, Professor of Russian and gender equality (p.8), highlighting that gender
conquer natural difference” (p.10). This view East European Studies at the University of pay gaps still existed and that women’s entry
echoes Armstrong’s own words in his 2001 Pennsylvania, argues that unregulated capi- into the workforce was not always to the bene-
talism is bad for women, and that by learning fit of them personally, but in the interests of
from the history of socialism we can create a the state, or for the ‘collective good’ (p.10).
more egalitarian path to our collective future. Nevertheless, state socialism provided educa-
To make her argument she explores the tional opportunities for women and entry into
socialisation of women in the workplace, the workplace, allowing them to develop their
considers childbearing from a social and own skill sets. The availability of state support
economic viewpoint, and discusses women in also meant that financial pressures on women
leadership, women as citizens, and, in refer- generally eased.
ence to the title, women’s sexuality.
She begins by examining sexuality in Ghodsee addresses popular criticisms of
popular culture, highlighting that when we what used to be called ‘actually existing social-
turn on the TV or open a magazine we are ism’: an inefficient economic system; bread
often immediately presented with sexualised lines; curtain-twitching neighbours divulging
images. This demonstrates capitalism’s information to the secret police; at worst,
tendency to commodify sexuality, women’s terrifying repression and Stalin’s famines. She
bodies, and basic human emotions, thus
normalising this behavior and helping to
create unequal conditions for women. Ghod-
see presents a series of arguments to show

56 Philosophy Now August/September 2021 Book Reviews

Books

acknowledges that there were certainly fail- which forced women into mixed counselling survival of the fittest in which both ‘merit’ and
ures in past socialist experiments, but claims
there were also extraordinary successes, which sessions – spaces where they might not feel ‘fittest’ have gendered interpretations. There
are worth salvaging in challenging capitalism.
Here she quotes Spinoza, “If you want the comfortable discussing their concerns. Her is an acknowledgement of the impact race has
future to be different from the past, study the
past” (p.23). This is the only mention of a book also addresses the necessity of creating on the advancement of women’s progress
traditional philosopher in the entire book.
There are however numerous references to female role models, highlighting the success under capitalism, too; and mention of how
early 20th century Marxist social and feminist
theorists, such as Clara Zetkin and August of state-mandated quotas for women to fulfil power hierarchies afford some women more
Bebel, who were revered in post-
war Eastern Europe. This, in my leadership positions. Ghodsee also acknowl- privilege than others. However, the brevity
opinion, is one of the strengths
of the book, as it opens up a edges that quota-filling can lead to compa- with which this is covered is quite surprising,
refreshing and innovative
approach to feminism typically nies ticking boxes rather than reshaping being confined to a couple of pages. It is also
omitted from accounts today.
The book is also scattered with societal attitudes and counteracting uncon- noticeable that of the eleven photos of femi-
biographies of feminists, which
humanizes the more abstract scious gender stereotypes, and addresses the nists in the book, all bar Angela Davis are
ideas in personal ways.
white. Furthermore, the only
There are two chapters
exploring sex, focusing specifi- (extremely vague) reference to
cally on sexual economics and
the normalisation of sex under trans women is a mention of the
socialism in comparison to the
West’s puritanical hangups. Eastern Bloc failing to be
Ghodsee presents studies show-
ing that women in the German concerned with gender noncon-
Democratic Republic experi-
enced higher levels of sexual formity (p.9). A questionable use
satisfaction compared to those
in West Germany. This is of the phrase ‘pretty woman’ in
attributed to a number of
factors, such as relationships which the adjective adds no value
being based on love and mutual
need instead of an idea of them to the meaning of the sentence,
as commodities for consump-
tion; people retreating to the private sphere Rosie highlights the author’s lack of a
to avoid state interference; and generally,
people having more time for sex, with fewer the critique of beauty ideals or the
commercial distractions. Sex was also
encouraged by a state eager to distract from Riveter manner in which they are
economic deprivation and travel restrictions.
constructed under capitalism, or
Ghodsee shows that the introduction of
socialist ideals within contemporary West- any radical alternatives that social-
ern capitalist systems could be beneficial to
women. She advocates a Universal Basic ism might offer on female body
Income to compensate for women’s unpaid
household labours, as well as an expansion image. The lack of intersectional-
of public services. She also advocates the
introduction of job guarantees, which would ity on matters of race and gender
be beneficial for anyone who might face
future job cuts due to the rise of artificial identity is quite disappointing,
intelligence. Ghodsee shows how cuts to
public services have had significant negative and frankly, surprising in a femi-
effects on women’s mental health, using a
prominent example of a cut to a publicly- nist book written in the present
funded women-only counselling service
climate.

Otherwise I enjoyed this book,

particularly Professor Ghodsee’s

writing style. The text has a witty,

dry tone, making it an accessible

text, particularly as an introduc-

tion to feminism, capitalism, and

socialism. The author includes

concern that such quotas can exclude non- personal anecdotes, lending context to the

white and/or non-middle-class women. reality of sexism in capitalist societies. So I

The book has various elements of inter- would recommend Why Women Have Better

sectionality. Intersectionality is the study of Sex Under Socialism to the general readership

how the different facets of a person’s identity of Philosophy Now. However, I would not

– such as gender, religion, race or social class describe it as a traditional philosophical text,

– interact to affect their position in society. but rather as an introductory book on femi-

Indeed, the nature of the book’s subject nism. For (vastly) more in-depth and inter-

matter requires recognition of the impact sectional approaches to feminism,

social class has on women’s opportunities. Shulamith Firestone’s The Dialectic of Sex,

Ghodsee states that female emancipation was Reni Eddo-Lodge’s Why I’m No Longer

fundamental to the socialist vision from its Talking To White People About Race, or Helen

inception, although class identity was always Hester’s Xenofeminism, would provide better

privileged over gender identity. She doesn’t philosophical overviews.

think that women cannot succeed under capi- © AMBER EDWARDS 2021

talism, or take up leadership positions Amber Edwards is a librarian currently living

(Margaret Thatcher and Angela Merkel are in quarantine Rome.

examples). Rather, she argues that they have

to do so under a model which is fundamen- • Why Women Have Better Sex Under Socialism,

tally against their progress because capitalism Kristen R. Ghodsee, 2018, Vintage, £9.99 pb, 240

is based on ideals of meritocracy and the pages, ISBN: 978-1529110579

Book Reviews August/September 2021 Philosophy Now 57

BRIMSTONE & TREACLE

Film Thomas R. Morgan notes a diabolical, and angelic,
case of anti-realism.

FILM IMAGES © MGM 1982 Having always been intrigued by trate my observations, than its original 1976 quotation from Kierkegaard: “there resides
this controversial tale by the TV counterpart, where the antagonist is infinitely more good in the demonic than in
British playwright Dennis unequivocally mischievous and demonic. the trivial man.” However, Martin’s nature
Potter, it’s interesting to me to is explored much more subtly in the film.
notice how my appreciation of its meanings has Written by Potter apparently during a This is pertinent especially when we come
altered since I first watched the film in 1982. period of intense anguish and moral cyni- to understand more about the character of
cism, bordering on what sounds like a Tom Bates. It is clear that Tom’s cynical
Changing interpretations is a nervous breakdown, Brimstone and Treacle attitude and adulterous tendencies –
phenomenon common to all forms of art. has a simple plot, with minimal characters revealed through flashbacks to a sexual liai-
With maturity, new levels of meaning are and locations. A family consisting of a son with his secretary – and his appeals to
discovered within what initially appeared middle-aged couple, Tom (in the film such afflictions as ‘human disappointment’,
straightforward – even if the artists weren’t played by Denholm Elliot, reprising his role make him equally if not more detestable than
conscious of those meanings during the act from 1976) and Norma Bates (Joan the sneering and mealy-mouthed Martin.
of creating it! There is danger of course, in Plowright), and their profoundly disabled This in turn challenges assumptions about
imposing meanings that aren’t really daughter Patti (Suzanna Hamilton), has its the primary source of evil being located
intended, but I have come to believe that in inner dynamics challenged when a stranger, outside of human beings themselves.
the case of Brimstone and Treacle, layers of calling himself Martin, infiltrates the
meaning are available in a full appreciation already tense environment on the pretence Schizophrenic Reality
of its plot. For many years, the media’s fixa- of returning Tom’s wallet.
One philosophical perspective which
tion with the sexual abuse elements in the Martin (played by Sting), first intention- resonates with this note of caution, and
story, and subsequent censorship, ally bumps into Tom in London. After an which can be adopted to analyse the film, is
contributed to an overshadowing of the awkward conversation where Martin anti-realism. The term was coined by the
tale’s more subtle and intriguing philosoph- attempts to convince Tom that he is an old British philosopher Michael Dummett in
ical and religious aspects, some of which I family acquaintance, Martin feigns light- 1982, only coincidentally the same year that
want to explore here. Although Brimstone headedness, collapsing in the street. Tom the film was released. There are many
and Treacle can be most obviously analysed uses the diversion to give the strange young branches of anti-realism, including scien-
in terms of its moral messages and ethical man the slip. Subsequently, Martin is seen tific, linguistic, and metaphysical versions;
implications, here I want to focus on its to be in possession of Tom’s wallet (even but they all share the notion that reality is
treatment of reality itself. here there is ambiguity as to whether not simply an objective phenomenon. Anti-
Martin stole or found the wallet), which realism nevertheless allows an overriding
The film was converted into two contains personal details, allowing Martin reality which underpins other, contrasting
dramatic versions for the screen; one a TV to trace Tom to his ‘cosy’ family home. subjective realities. (It’s not to be confused
drama, the other a movie. Here I will with Nelson Goodman’s ‘irrealism’, in
concentrate on the film version directed by As I said, in the televised version the which different subjective realities do not
Richard Locraine, which is far more character of Martin is portrayed as explicitly share a larger common reality.)
ambiguous, and thus more suitable to illus- demonic. The drama even opens with this
The philosopher Ray Holland illustrated
anti-realism effectively in his ‘child on a rail-
way crossing’ example. If one were to
witness a boy narrowly escaping serious
injury or death on a railway crossing as a
train brakes just in time to avoid hitting him,
one could interpret the event in more than
one way. It could just be a case of luck,
wherein the prevailing conditions just
happened to work in the boy’s favour. On
the other hand, one could attach greater
significance to the event, perhaps perceiving
a divine or miraculous influence in the
outcome. Holland’s point is that, although
factual claims are being made about the
event, the truth cannot be known as objec-
tive fact, and therefore the reality of what

58 Philosophy Now l August/September 2021

Film

happened necessarily takes on a subjective describe it – as God-created or uncreated, the dull, unappreciated limbo of her daily
aspect. In other words, it is just as true to say for example. But for an anti-realist the routine. Her reference to ‘this little box’ not
that what happened was miraculous as to say absence of objective criteria renders all being ‘all there is’, in relation to the limits of
it was a coincidence: both takes on reality are viable interpretations real. Therefore, on her world, hints at realities beyond the ones
equally valid, neither having been disproved. this view, God is both real and not real. And immediately perceived, as well as Martin’s
Anti-realism in this sense is therefore the as long as the respective uses of language are short-lived but seemingly positive impact on
idea that contrasting perspectives can be misinterpreted by the other side, the two her life.
simultaneously equally valid or real. realities will remain polarised.
However, it is not only through Martin
A related idea was suggested by Ludwig Such a polarised dynamic is at play in that the distinct realities of Norma and Tom
Wittgenstein in his Philosophical Investiga- Brimstone and Treacle. Two realities (at least) are realised. The couple’s distinct attitudes
tions (1953), in which he explored the rela- are superimposed upon the events as they towards their daughter Patti and her condi-
tionship between reality and language. As unfold – so much so that the characters tion serve to highlight further how a single
opposed to ‘picturing’ reality – as he origi- could be said to occupy different worlds. state of affairs can contain multiple yet
nally considered in his earlier Tractatus The contrast between these realities is equally real interpretations. Tom exhibits
Logico-Philosophicus (1922) – here language central to the drama. little hope regarding Patti’s future, with
derives meaning through its use: through exclamations like ‘there are no miracles’ and
the context and its application. Wittgen- Tom Bates is immediately suspicious of ‘she’s gone from us’. It could be said that
stein here wrote that “the limits of my the interloper Martin. He views him as Tom occupies a kind of hell in his certainty
language means the limits of my world.” (apparently) unemployed, scheming and as that his bitter and cynical reality is absolute;
This implies, for example, that an atheist a potential danger to Patti. Norma, by whereas Norma’s take on reality is hopeful,
experiences a different version of reality to contrast, is swiftly taken in by Martin’s bordering on the mystical – claiming for
a theist by virtue of the language they use to charms, welcoming the stranger into the example that there is ‘a light, a definite light’
family home, essentially as an antidote to in Patti’s expression. These dual realities are
extended in their own mutually exclusive
directions with the arrival of Martin, who is
a damning devil to Tom, and a saving angel
to Norma.

In the film version of Brimstone and Trea-
cle, Sting’s Martin is never explicitly revealed
to be angel or devil; rather, he is both.
Although he commits atrocious acts, their
true meaning and essence are left hidden.
His rape of Patti goes unseen by both Tom
and Norma. You might imagine that if she
had known, this would have realigned
Norma’s reality with Tom’s, but it’s not so
simple. Interestingly (and disturbingly),
when Patti recovers her mental faculties in
the final moments of the film – as a result of
the abuse by Martin, it is implied – her first
lucid accusation is not against her abuser. It
is against her father for his adultery, of which
she has seen evidence, just before the traffic
accident which led to her condition. Like
Norma and Tom, the viewer must consult
their own reality to decide what Martin is
and means. We are left with a single individ-
ual who could be good or bad, depending on
the reality one occupies.

© THOMAS R. MORGAN 2021

Thomas R. Morgan is teacher of religious studies,
philosophy, and ethics at Westcliff High, UK.

August/September 2021 l Philosophy Now 59

The Riddle of

WoTndaeilnlrisland the Sphincter

We are all familiar with the so- Raymond Tallis reflects on embodiment.
called ‘Riddle of the Sphinx’,
or think we are. There is, though, to a principled opposition to the out of a Christmas cracker: ‘What moves on
however, something more very idea that the variousness of entities – four legs in the morning, two legs at noon,
mysterious than that riddle. It is the Riddle planets, chaffinches, hurtful comments – can and three legs in the evening?’ The answer
of the Sphincter, or, more precisely, the be reduced to a single kind of stuff. Or even is a human being, who begins by crawling
Riddle of the Two Sphincters. But I am two kinds of stuff, such as matter and mind. on all fours, proceeds to walk on two legs,
getting ahead of myself. and ends by leaning on a third leg that is a
There is something else behind my onto- stick. But there is a deeper riddle manifest
I am an ontological agnostic: in other logical agnosticism: an awareness of the in the Sphinx itself: the creature has a
words I don’t know what the fundamental curious nature of human beings. We are human headquarters and animal hindquar-
stuff of the universe is. It is unlikely to be ‘embodied subjects’, inseparable from our ters. This is a compelling metaphor for the
something like pebbles (materialism), bodies, and yet not identical with them in ambiguous beings that we are and justifies
because that would leave thoughts unex- the sense of being defined by their physical the pun (if anything can justify a pun) in the
plained; or something like thoughts (ideal- properties. I have sometimes characterised title of this piece.
ism), because that would leave pebbles unex- this first-person embrace of third-person
plained. Suggesting that pebbles and (or no-person) flesh as ‘ambodied being’. The sphincters in question are the mouth
thoughts are two aspects of the same stuff (No, this is not a misprint.) As Eric and the anus – the former being described
hardly helps – they scarcely look like verso Matthews put it in The Philosophy of Merleau- with characteristic charm by Samuel Beckett
and recto. My agnosticism goes a bit further, Ponty (2002), “our inner life as conscious in Murphy (1938) as ‘the anus of the face’.
persons necessarily develops out of the They are the beginning and the end of one
Oedipus & the Sphinx impersonal physiological life of a certain continuous passage, the alimentary tract.
by Gustave Moreau kind of organism.” Making sense of the rela- The one emits an estimated lifetime total of
tionship between the ‘I’ of the subject and between 100 and 800 million words, and the
Both ‘sphinx’ and ‘sphincter’ come from the ‘it’ of the body is the essential challenge other approximately 11,000 kgs of you-
the Greek for ‘strangle’, which is what of reaching a philosophical understanding know-what in about 27,000 sittings. The
the Sphinx would do to you if you of human beings. difference in outputs could not be more
couldn’t answer her riddle profound. This asymmetry is in sharp
The emphasis on embodiment is unsur- contrast to what is seen in the symmetry else-
prising in someone such as your columnist, where in the animal kingdom, for which what
who has spent several decades as a physician is going in at one end is not as fundamentally
intervening in the complex partnership different from what is going out at the other.
between the ‘I’ of the person and the ‘it’ of
the body, trying to load the dice in favour of The distance between the two sphincters
the former. Day in and day out I had to can be measured in feet and inches, but the
confront our hybrid nature. This is why the difference between the headquarters of the
body has loomed large in my philosophical subject and the hindquarters of the body is
writing. I have devoted books to the hand, to of a different kind. It is not a simple case of
hunger, to the head, and even to the index spatial separation; nor is the difference
finger. My approach to philosophical anthro- captured by the contrast between (to echo
pology does not pretend to explain how the Gilbert Ryle’s famous phrase) a ghost and a
‘I’ arose out of the ‘it’, but it does attempt to machine. The semantic output from the
capture the many complex relationships front end and the material output from the
between them. At least it unpeels – and, yes, rear end belong to different orders of being.
celebrates – the mystery of our nature. How is this possible?

Physical & Philosophical Truths Regular readers will know that I am not
persuaded that electrochemical activity in
Which brings me back to my beginning, to the brain explains how flesh gives rise to
another approach to our hybridity – a route conscious subjects experiencing that flesh as
that is a little less elevated. their very being. Similarly, nothing in the
body as revealed to us through natural
Readers familiar with the traditional science explains the transformation of
Riddle of the Sphinx will know that it is exhaled air into an account of the world in
rather disappointing. It could have come

60 Philosophy Now August/September 2021

which the exhalers find themselves; and nor 1546). His actions resulted in a profound WoTndaeilnlrisland
does it explain how The Stinker is also The split in the Church between Catholics and
Thinker, who not only wraps faeces in paper Protestants, which among other things led to An improved
purchased for that purpose, but also the Thirty Years’ War – this conflict directly angle
encloses them in inverted commas. And this or indirectly killed about a third of the popu-
reminds me of a retort to those who, wishing lation of Europe (although the Peace of their various ways to be independent of the
to humble us, quote St Augustine’s anatom- Westphalia ending the war established some body. Incarnation comes to look like impris-
ically correct observation that Inter faeces et of the principles embodied in modern inter- onment, although in the body’s absence it
urinam nascimur: ‘We are born between national relations). Protestantism may also would be entirely unclear as why or how
faeces and urine’. It’s true. But we are the have been behind the rise of capitalism, Plato, Descartes, or Kant should have been
only living creatures who articulate and whose ascent continues to engulf the globe. located at a particular place (teaching in
reflect on this fact – and in Latin. Whether or not that’s true, and establishing Athens, growing up in Touraine, lecturing
causation in history is a difficult business, in Konigsberg), or living at a particular time
Thinker’s Block there can be no doubt that Luther was in (fifth century BCE, seventeenth and eigh-
Humour plays with our ambiguous status as historical terms a giant. teenth centuries CE).
persons and as organisms. Back in 1900, in
his essay ‘On Laughter’, Henri Bergson In the light of this, his earthy, indeed As we move in the weightless element of
identified one of the key elements of notoriously scatological, sense of humour is metaphysical thought, it is salutary to
comedy as the obtrusion of mechanism into surprising. Less so, perhaps, when we learn remind ourselves of the indubitably weighty
the flow of our lives. Your columnist slip- that he was a lifelong martyr to constipation. element of our bodies; to remember our
ping on a banana skin and thus becoming a Just how much this affected him is illus- beginnings as babies who, as Father Ronald
lump of stuff subject to gravitational forces trated by a letter to his wife, sent just days Knox put it, are “A loud noise at one end and
would be such an instance, though he might before he died in 1546, in which he praised no sense of responsibility at the other.” And
not enjoy the slapstick so wholeheartedly as hop-based beer for its laxative properties our endings may not be much different. H.
passers-by. and announced with immense satisfaction sapiens reaching for well-formed formulas
the ‘three bowel movements’ he had had leading to a satisfying conclusion, and H.
More to our present point is the familiar that morning. Famous last turds, perhaps. crapiens hoping for a well-formed stool and
trope that places Rodin’s Thinker on the a conclusive bowel action, are bound
toilet. It seems unlikely that the sculptor So what has constipation to do with together in a shared fate.
would have appreciated the joke. He might, Luther’s role in shaping the course of history
however, have been intrigued by a recent in the half millennium since he nailed his If you are reading this on the toilet, you
article, in that journal feverishly consulted by Ninety-Five theses to the door of the church may need to absturge your podex, and you
philosophers, Techniques in Coloproctology, of Wittenberg in 1517, and his star perfor- must, of course, wash your hands.
published by Cleveland Clinic in Florida. It mance at the Diet of Worms in 1521?
argued that the Thinker’s posture assists © PROF. RAYMOND TALLIS 2021
defecation by improving the anorectal angle. Luther was entirely open about the many
hours he spent in contemplation on the Raymond Tallis’s latest book, Freedom. An
It is possible that the protracted endeav- toilet. Indeed, when the lavatory in Witten- Impossible Reality will be published in
our to defaecate may be good for thought. berg where he had spent so much time in September 2021.
The toilet is typically sealed off from the solitary confinement was unearthed in 2004,
flow of quotidian events: like abstract Stefan Rhein, the director of the Luther
thought, it is seasonless and placeless. Memorial Foundation, argued the impor-
Secondly, you are not likely to be inter- tance of the find on the grounds that it was
rupted. Thirdly, there is something about where the birth of the Reformation took
concentrated thought that overlaps with the place. I am tempted to say that Luther’s
effort of defecation, as Rodin himself famous proclamation ‘Here I stand; I can do
acknowledged: no other’ may have had its origin in ‘Here I
sit; I can do nothing’ – the eternal cry of
“What makes my Thinker think is that he Homo constipatus. But I will resist this temp-
tation. Nevertheless, to borrow and modify
thinks not only with his brain, his knitted what the poet Philip Larkin said of himself,
constipation may have been for Luther what
brow, his distended nostril and his com- daffodils were to Wordsworth.

pressed lips, but with every muscle of his Beginnings & Endings

arms, back and legs, with his clenched fist My tentative circling round ambodiment,
trying to ascend to metaphysics on a wave of
and his gripping toes.” schoolroom giggles, is haunted by the
ghosts of Plato, Descartes, and Kant, all of
Which brings me naturally to the most whom gave a privileged status to the mind
famous of all constipated thinkers – a man of and distinguished the conscious subject
extraordinary strength of conviction and from the animal body. Indeed, Plato’s
unimaginable courage whose influence on immortal soul, Descartes’ ‘I’ who thinks,
the history of the world, for good or ill, has and Kant’s transcendental subject, seem in
been greater perhaps than that of any other
individual in the last five hundred years. I am
speaking, of course, of Martin Luther (1483-

August/September 2021 Philosophy Now 61

Subscribe to Philosophy Now

philosophynow.org/shop

6 IDEA-PACKED ISSUES FOR £18/US$35

By subscribing to the print edition of Philosophy Now you
can save up to 37% off the newsstand price, have your
copies delivered to your door and enjoy unrestricted
access to our vast online archive of past articles!
Subscribe today at philosophynow.org/shop or fill out and
return one of the coupons below.

Subscription inquiries: [email protected] or phone 01959 534171
To tell us about a change of address, please email [email protected]

UK / Rest of World United States

Name _____________________________________________ Name _____________________________________________
Address ___________________________________________
Address ___________________________________________ __________________________________________________

__________________________________________________ Email (for password) ________________________________

Email (for password) ________________________________ Subscribe to Philosophy Now for 6 issues ($35)
Subscribe to Philosophy Now for 12 issues ($64)
Subscribe to Philosophy Now for 6 issues (1 year) starting with Issue #145/Issue #146 (delete as appropriate)

Subscribe to Philosophy Now for 12 issues (2 years) Buy The Ultimate Guide to Theory of Knowledge

UK £18/£32 (GBP)

Canada $39/$71 (CAD)

New Zealand $49/$89 (NZD)

Australia $50/$84 (AUD)

Europe 25€/45€ (EUR)

Rest of World £23/£39 (GBP)

starting with Issue 145/Issue 146 (delete as appropriate)

Buy The Ultimate Guide to Theory of Knowledge Buy back issues in PRINT (please specify issue numbers)
______________________________________
Buy back issues in PRINT (please specify issue numbers)
______________________________________ Buy _____ binders to hold back issues (insert quantity)

Buy _____ binders to hold back issues (insert quantity) TOTAL AMOUNT PAYABLE: $_________

TOTAL AMOUNT PAYABLE: _________ Please make your check payable to ‘Philosophy Documentation
Center’ or fill in your Mastercard /Visa /Maestro card details below:

Please make your cheque payable to ‘Philosophy Now’ or fill in your Card no.
Mastercard /Visa /Maestro card details below:
Expiry_________________ Security Code__________

Card no. Name on card _______________________________________________

Expiry__________________ Security Code___________ and send it to: Philosophy Documentation Center,
P.O. Box 7147
Name on card _______________________________________________ Charlottesville, VA 22906-7147
U.S.A.
and send it to: Philosophy Now Subscriptions
Kelvin House, Grays Road,
Westerham, Kent TN16 2JB, (You can also order on 800-444-2419 or email [email protected])
United Kingdom

62 Philosophy Now August/September 2021

Back Issues & Digital Editions

Back Issues in Print The Ultimate Guide Series

Issue 143 Art & Morality / What is Art? / Social Each Ultimate Guide is a col-
Art / Malign Photography / Moore’s lection of some of the best
Ethics / Covid & Phil / Freedom / articles from past issues of
Arendt Brief Life / Sci fi and meaning Philosophy Now, and some
new material too. Each is
Issue 144 Modern Moral Issues: Protest, Fat divided into five chapters
Shaming, Racism & Stoicism, Election covering the main aspects of
Meddling, Animals, Artifiicial Wombs / a core philosophical topic.
Deleuze & Guattari / CS Lewis Brief Life Full colour, 116 pages.

We still have copies of these earlier back issues: The Ultimate Guide to Theory
2, 39-40, 55-80, 83-89, 91-98, 100-106, 108-116, 118-122, 124-139, 142 of Knowledge is out now. You
You can also buy PDFs of all past issues. can find it on newsstands,
For full details, please visit philosophynow.org/shop buy it from our website
Back issues in print cost £3.95 each if you live in the UK (inc p&p) or shop, or order it on the
US$10/7€/A$12/C$12/NZ$14/£7.50 elsewhere via airmail. For every opposite page. The Ultimate
three you buy, we’ll give you a fourth for free (please tell us which Guide to Ethics, The Ultimate Guide to Metaphysics and The
you would like). Ultimate Guide to Mind are available as PDFs or on Kindle.

Binders: Our smart green Philosophy Now binders each hold 12 Including postage The Ultimate Guide to Theory of Knowledge
costs: £8.25 (UK), $18.95 (USA), 13.75€ (Eur), Aus$25.50,
magazines. UK£9.75, US$25, Europe 22€, Australia $32, Canada $32, Can$24.25, NZ$28.25, or £14.25 (Rest of World). Or you can
NZ$35 or Rest of World £19. buy the PDF file from our website shop for a lower cost.

Digital (see philosophynow.org/digital) Gifts and Merch

Website Subscriptions A wide range of Philosophy Now t-shirts, coffee mugs, tote
bags and other gifts in a bewildering variety of designs are now
Print subscriptions to Philosophy Now do not include Kindle, available from our partners Spreadshirt. All sales help to keep our
Nook, Zinio or App content but they do include access to our editors and illustrators supplied with gin and biscuits.
website which has over 3,000 articles from past issues. A pass-
word is available on request to print subscribers or is sent auto- Please follow the link at the foot of the philosophynow.org/shop
matically if you subscribe online. We also sell website subscrip- page to visit our store on the Spreadshirt website.
tions separately, from our store at:
philosophynow.org/shop

IP-based online access is available for Philosophy Now
schools and colleges – please visit
philosophynow.org/institutions

App Available in the Apple App Store and
Google Play store. Free sample issue
included.

Kindle Buy a single issue or an ongoing
subscription. (30 day free trial)

Nook Available on Barnes & Noble’s Nook reader and the
Nook app. (14 day free trial)

Zinio There is an edition for the Zinio app on iPad and
Android. Single issue or ongoing subscription.

August/September 2021 Philosophy Now 63

Fiction

Freedom &
Responsibility

Cora Cruz finds that sometimes you have to take both.

That night the children had to be given dinner, bathed, childhood. Those with a lot of baggage usually protest their meta-
and put to bed all alone by Dad, such a rare thing physical freedom all too much, he explained. He personally likes
they weren’t sure what to make of it. Mom was busy metaphors of marionettes and machines. Between the marionette
learning the difficult lesson that you’re only ever as metaphors, he stroked her hand. Discussion of general child-
smart as the person you’re speaking with. hood trauma ensued. A high school friend of his had a mother
who’d died when he was young. The friend’s father had kept a
Late train home, red wine headache already in her temples, painting of her, nude from the waist up, in his room. The editor
she anticipates Dad’s subtle reproaches, the slight resentful wondered what effect that might have had on his friend…
distancing that advertises his jealousy. She will call him on it.
She will defend herself. This was work: a business get-together Shame gnawed at her on the trip back to the suburbs. She
for a drink, to discuss an article. To discuss potential intersec- had played along with him, paralyzed, not willing or not think-
tions of interests and projects with the editor of an interdisci- ing to retrieve the arguments he had ignored, pick them out
plinary journal, of which there are not so many. The editor from the rubbish of petty motives, slam them back on the table
had rejected one of her essays but had generously taken time in front of him and insist that he look. Instead, she’d been com-
to read another, and wanted to have a conversation about it in plicit in her reduction to a puppet: a puppet of her upbringing,
person. “Why in person?” Dad had scoffed: “If he cared about merely reactive to how men felt about women as the result of
the article, he’d have come right out about it in an email, given their own upbringing. She had allowed it. She had not wanted
his comments that way.” to be rude.

Dad had been right. Afterwards, through the mists of her migraine, she reflected
Mom had accepted the invitation partly out of politeness. that she had no objection in principle to the metaphors of a
Behind the politeness was the wish to gain an ally in the pub- machine, if it were not for what she took as its most over-
lishing world, but most of all the fantasy of a kind of conversa- whelming implication: a machine can do anything, in theory,
tion one reads about in Plato’s dialogues: sparring that opens except care about what is right and good. In all the movies of
new possibilities of meaning, that dispels conceits and pseudo- robots taking over the world, they are capable of the will to sur-
problems, exorcises illusions and the distortions they cause, and vive and dominate, and they can learn and evolve. But a machine
makes fresh life possible. She’d been guilty of conversation- never asks, “What is the best way to live?” It has no values.
lust! Well. Sometimes you have to stray in order to appreciate
what you have. That’s the nice thing about vacations. That it is precisely here, in the process of questioning, doubt-
The editor had not looked pleased when she’d arrived half ing, rethinking, revising, and searching around the question of
an hour late. Grimacing at his laptop at a corner table, he’d what is good and how to reconcile and prioritize our goods,
motioned her to sit down. Mom chattered by way of apology that we must look for our freedom, had, she believed, been
about the hassle of the cross-town trek at this time of day, the brought out fairly explicitly in her paper. Our humanity lies
hour right after work. How Manhattan made her hate people. not in some product of consciousness, pinned and dissected on
When he closed the laptop and fished out her paper, it was the examining table of our thought, but in the light of the gaze
crumpled, covered with comments. Mom got her hopes up: itself, the turn of attention and the eternal moving beyond what
maybe he’d read it hard and really understood it, and would is seen.
take the points further with insightful critique. So difficult to
find someone outside academia – even within it – who can do All this had utterly escaped the editor. Why had she not
that with philosophy – with her philosophy. thrust it right back under his nose, reiterated, defended, and
It’s a paper on free will. After summarizing the arguments, clarified? Why had she not taken charge of their exchange when
pro and con, she put forward her conclusion as a synthesis of the she saw the turn it was taking? And what did the editor derive
two ostensibly opposed sides. The editor, however, did not men- from the view of himself as a machine, a being for whom value
tion the arguments. Instead he asked about her motivations, her is not an issue and never could be? Is it comfort he seeks from
this vision, or pain? Does he insist on reducing the world to
puppetry because of some feeling of ineffectiveness – in short,

64 Philosophy Now August/September 2021

Fiction

ILLUSTRATIONS © JAIME RAPOSO 2021. TO SEE MORE OF HIS ART, PLEASE VISIT JAIMERAPOSO.COM

because he himself feels like a puppet? Regardless, he had succeeded in level. A mean, sordid world was all that
Misery loves company. Maybe he’d felt putting the ethical question out of play occupied the space between them. Sartre
ineffective since childhood, with the this evening, and she had been trans- and de Beauvoir would have stood up to
absent father and domineering mother formed from an author of arguments, it, she was sure. They would have real-
he mentioned, and freedom is his sour articulator of reasons, asker of questions, ized immediately what was happening –
grapes. Why grant to others what one seeker of conditions of possibilities of the objectification of herself, the turning
denies oneself? Is the resentful putting- truth and goodness, into a petty, grudge- of her subjectivity into an inert ‘thing-
out-of-play of the ethical question, the holding product of a warped childhood. ness’ for his purposes. In any event, for
rendering of an indifferent world, a The dignity of intellectual pursuit turned all the outward symbols of her adulthood
revenge for the indifference he’d experi- squalid by the stroking of her hand, the – job, home, children, marriage – when
enced toward himself, when he was help- question this asked, and the answer it this was tested in the gentle light of the
less and needed someone to look out for implied. cafe, among the clink of dishes, well-
him – someone to care? mannered gossip, and solicitous waiters,
She had been brought down to his

August/September 2021 Philosophy Now 65

Fiction

she was proved nothing but a child: weak and manipulable. would turn down any other worldly gain: the clarity of their
Sweet and compliant. Lost for words. If there were such a thing minds and the exercise of their rational nature is their only sat-
as freedom, and if it were connected in some way with auton- isfaction,” Dad suggests.
omy and dignity, it was nowhere evident here.
“But only the corrupt and inferior would have wealth and influ-
*** ence, being the ones who’d care enough about it to acquire it.”

At home the kids, settled already, popped out from their room “Well there’s that small speed bump.”
and tumbled over each other to see their mother. The youngest Dad reaches for the other foot.
felt solid and warm against her chest, his face against hers, his “Assuming the better thinkers could gain power, wouldn’t
breath milky. The middle child bounced around, wild that Mom they want to maintain the division of labor?” Mom asks. “If
had returned. She had refused to eat her dinner, under the cir- everyone wanted to be a philosopher, who’d do all the work?”
cumstances. The oldest – already old enough to be aloof – like Dad is unflappable: “We would develop two separate ide-
everyone else, wanted hugs and a story. Mom regretted wast- ologies: one of freedom, for the ruling class; another of happi-
ing her evening elsewhere. ness, for the manipulated classes. As long as the happiness is
associated with material or social gain, the gullible will remain
Later, in bed herself, a couple of aspirin and leftover spaghetti productive against any inclinations of laziness or contrariness,
having taken the edge from her headache, she clears things up particularly since the appetites for wealth and status can never
somewhat with Dad. be fully satisfied. In the wake of the death of God, happiness
is the perfect ideology to fuel an eternal treadmill. For extra
“Would it be possible,” she asks, “for a computer to actually motivation and for the particularly foolish, happiness could
care about being good, think about right and wrong – not for also be equated with freedom. Only the insightful would be
any particular function – but in and of itself? And might it then able to tell the difference. Maybe they’ll be lucky and get pulled
sacrifice its own survival and well-being for what is right? Could out of the crowd. Or maybe their insight would just make them
a machine look into truth and goodness for its own sake?” miserable.” Dad always made a good Ivan Karamazov.
Mom giggles, a bubble of pure fun. Something has loosened.
“Are you really asking what self-awareness has to do with She’s no longer toiling through the mud but skimming the surf, now
autonomy, what this has to do with being good, and what any leading, now following, her husband. But it’s time to muscle in: “So
of it has to do with being distinctly human?” the fight over free will is really just a symptom of a necessary divi-
sion of labor? A dualism emerging from political economy?”
“Maybe nothing, maybe everything. In the movies, robots “It is a silly argument. You’re right, better thinking and
are slaves, and are disposable, because they lack these qualities. nobler values will never command any resources. Plato’s ruling
The enslavement is justified because they’re only tools. That class of philosopher-guardians would never actually have the
gets called into question whenever we see that at least one of means to rule, unless it were corrupted.’’
them is invested in meaning. His individuality matters to him, “Are leaders ever noble, though? Haven’t we just decided
but social goods matter too. He is willing to sacrifice one to they’d keep freedom only for themselves? What would a thought-
the other, or at any rate feels the tension between them. Above ful, altruistic philosopher do, if he were put in charge?”
all, he does this on his own – no one has programmed it, cer- “Well, there was Socrates…”
tainly not his original owner.” “Precisely. He never aspired to be in charge. Moreover,
while he was hanging out exercising the independence of his
Dad absently massages the foot Mom had placed in his lap intellect, chatting all day, who raised and fed his children,
along with the bottle of lotion: “So, we need robots promoted changed their diapers, cooked, cleaned, and earned their living?”
from slaves to wage-laborers?” This question, about the wisdom of the ancients, had always
nagged at Mom, despite her own homage to them.
“Yes. A class of workers who are just a little bit thoughtful. She closes her eyes, now relaxed. The lotion serves two pur-
Human-like, but not human enough to be equal; minds whom we poses: Dad’s hands are dry and rough, from all his scrubbing and
can put to use with good conscience. A little more lotion please.” diaper-changing. “Sartre turned down money and awards, to live
according to his principles,” Dad says, finishing her feet.
“Someone’s got to do all the boring work.” “He didn’t have kids to provide for. Freedom is all well and
“Could they be lesser persons by degrees? Or is that like good, until you have responsibility.”
being a little bit pregnant?” Mom muses. From the children’s room, an imperious cry announces the need
“If a certain manifestation of consciousness is our criterion for a midnight bottle. Returning, Mom finds Dad asleep. She rolls
of personhood, our working class robots could have it too, but him over and props a pillow against his back, for the snoring.
it would be mixed with a lot of lower grade stuff. We could see
them simply as inferior creatures, the way Plato likens manual © CORA CRUZ 2021
laborers, financiers, and so forth to lower grades of metal. They
might desire to think for themselves, but do so with less clar- Cora Cruz is currently a graduate student in philosophy at the New
ity and distinctness than we can. They’d be more susceptible School for Social Research in New York. She has written for New
to confusion and distraction. This would make them perfect Millenium Writings, 34th Parallel Magazine, and The Com-
for labor, because they’d need external guidance and would parative and Continental Philosophy Journal. Her recent philo-
readily confuse the rewards of careful thinking and virtuous sophical novel is The Meditations of Manuel de la Vega.
living with material gain and social standing, and could be moti-
vated this way for menial work. The perfect leaders, on the
other hand, would have no motive except virtue itself, and

66 Philosophy Now August/September 2021

THE HOME OF EXISTENTIAL TRAINING

MA in
EXISTENTIAL
AND HUMANIST
PASTORAL CARE

WWW.NSPC.ORG.UK/PASTORALCARE

NEW SCHOOL OF PSYCHOTHERAPY AND COUNSELLING
61–63 Fortune Green RoadɅLondonɅNW6 1DR

0207 435 8067 // 0203 515 0223Ʌ@ [email protected]Ʌ nspc.org.uk

This programme is quality assured by Middlesex University and you will receive a Middlesex award on successful completion.

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 2021: nchlondon.ac.uk