Offerings, Plans, Reflections
Conceptual Engineering; The Political Theory of Algorithms; Writing for the Public
Dear all,
After a fairly quiet month, we are now back to business as usual. Our new spring series begins on Tuesday with an event on political theory and algorithms; our new issue on “Where is Philosophy Going?” is out tomorrow; and we have uploaded an essay by Amie L. Thomasson looking at the fast-emerging field of “conceptual engineering”. More on all of this below.
Offerings
Your Sunday Read
“Philosophy as Conceptual Engineering”: In this essay, leading metaphysician Amie L. Thomasson offers an extremely clear and compelling overview of the rapidly emerging field of “conceptual engineering”. For Thomasson, to think of philosophy as engaged in conceptual engineering not only dissolves its alleged rivalry with the sciences, but it also leads to a different way of thinking about the relation between concepts and reality. As she puts it, when seen through this lens “we will no longer see concepts as simply transparent windows through which we may see reality, or report what we see. Instead, we can come to acknowledge the ways in which concepts can serve as tools to shape how we think and live.”
Event
“The Political Theory of Algorithms”: We are delighted to resume our collaboration with the wonderful folk at Boston Review. This is the first of three events we are co-hosting with them this spring (for details of the other two, see here).
Artificial intelligence and machine learning are reshaping our world. Powerful prediction tools are changing how decisions are made in key legal, medical, and consumer spheres, narrowing opportunities for the exercise of judgment, empathy, and creativity. How, then, are we to put democracy at the heart of AI governance? Join political theorist Josh Simons and philosopher Lily Hu to find out more…
New Print Issue: “Where is Philosophy Going?”
If we ended up reaching our second centenary in 2123, what will philosophy have contributed to the previous century? How can philosophical thinking open windows onto other possible futures? And, looking meta-philosophically, where is the discipline of philosophy going? What are its prospects and ambitions, both inside academia and beyond? Our new issue is on sale tomorrow. You can buy a copy here.
Here is an overview of the essays in the main section:
The Future of Philosophy: A Catalogue of Errors by Chi Rainer Bornfree
“One of the great mistakes is risking too little – not giving wisdom our absolute best effort, even if it necessarily means making a choice of errors.”
Philosophy Needs a New Definition by Costica Bradatan
“Philosophy has never only been about rational argumentation. It would be the saddest thing if it were, and it would not have lasted that long.”
Predicting the Future of Mind by Thomas Moynihan
“While few would argue there is no contingency in attitudes, it’s incredibly hard to ascertain just how much is there.”
Philosophy Born of Struggle by Vincent Lloyd
“Our current moment is unique in the extent to which we find an ethos of vulnerability in the present and a sense of diminution in the future.”
The Future of the History of Philosophy by Josh Platzky Miller and Lea Cantor
“We should abandon the idea of a ‘Western Philosophy’ and re-examine the history of philosophy without its distorting effects.”
Philosophy in the Trenches and Laboratory Benches of Science by Mel Andrews
“Philosophers are selected for and trained in the kind of abstract critical reasoning that is problematically absent from the sciences today, and, more importantly, they are encouraged to utilise it.”
The Weirding of the Analytic-Continental Divide by Tzuchien Tho
“Any consideration of the future of one’s own discipline is a combination of anecdotal evidence and wishful thinking.”
The Post-History of Alienation by Jensen Suther
“History for Hegel is not the self-unfolding of a metaphysical substance called “Spirit” but the process by which we attempt to realize the overriding value of autonomy.”
The Things that Matter Most Are the Things of Good Relationships by Jeremy Bendik-Keymer
“When we reason relationally, instead of seeking knowledge of the world or things we must (or find good to) do, we seek authentic connection.”
New Group: “Writing for the Public”
Are you looking to write and publish a piece of public philosophy? Over six weekly sessions, this group will explore the art of writing philosophy for the public, helping you to develop and write an essay from initial idea to completion. The groups will be a mix of discussion and writing time. In between groups, editorial feedback on draft essays will be provided by the group leader (me) and other experienced editors.
There are still a couple of spaces left. You can find out more and sign up here.
Plans
We have an editorial board meeting in the week ahead, so many a plan should be formulated then…
Reflections
This week, Jacob Cooper offers a reflection on philosophy as a way of life and the limits of self-knowledge:
Philosophy is often understood to be primarily a method or technique of inquiry, with prominent examples of such methods being Socratic dialogue and linguistic analysis. But the methods and techniques philosophers use depend upon a prior vision philosophy’s aim and orientation. So the challenge is first to consider first what philosophy’s purpose or orientation is to be, and then to choose a manner of inquiry appropriate to this specified goal. Linguistic analysis may seem a reasonable method if philosophy’s main orientation is towards truth and knowledge, but less so if it aims towards practical questions related to wisdom and the good life.
Anthony O’Hear contrasts the specialisation and impersonality of much academic philosophy with an understanding of philosophy as “a rational, but personal quest for meaning”, concluding that this latter approach is closer to “the true nature of the subject”. For O’Hear, “in the beginning and at the end, philosophy is a personal journey, crucial to the examined life Socrates thought so integral to human flourishing”. Central to this vision of philosophy, however, is the assumption that the examined life is in fact worth living and is integral to human flourishing, so let’s consider this assumption.
In Ancient times it was well understood that the conduct of the individual philosopher was inseparable from their particular theories or ideas. However, as James Miller has highlighted in his book Examined Lives, modern philosophy textbooks “generally scant the lives of philosophers, reinforcing the contemporary perception that philosophy is best understood as a purely technical discipline, revolving around specialized issues in semantics and logic”, such that “the truth of a proposition should be evaluated independently of anything we may know about the person holding that proposition”. For Ancient philosophers, however, “theorizing was but one mode of living life philosophically”, and the primary point of doing philosophy was to explore the kind of life that could be lived by taking the examined life and quest for wisdom seriously. Seen in this light, we do not lurch from pure technique to pure wisdom, but rather understand the two as crucial and inseparable elements of the philosophical enterprise. However, if knowledge becomes less centrally concerned with general and abstract features of the world, and equally with the more personal quest for self-knowledge, key questions arise regarding the quest for self-knowledge and its limits.
Miller asks: “Is self-knowledge even feasible – and, if so, to what degree?” It is Nietzsche who most clearly captures the central tension involved in this pursuit when he writes that “we are necessarily strangers to ourselves, we do not comprehend ourselves, we have to misunderstand ourselves”; similarly Goethe wrote that “man is a darkened being; he knows not whence he comes, nor whither he goes; he knows little of the world, and least of himself”. That Socrates appears to have set the gold standard for the philosophical life is undeniable; what may be denied is the plausibility of Plato’s account of Socrates’ life. What if the philosophical ideal of rational consistency in word and deed is in fact unliveable, feeding into the corpse-like image of the philosopher discussed above rather than the living philosopher of flesh and blood? As Miller concludes in his analysis of philosophical lives from Socrates to Nietzsche:
The moral of these philosophical biographies is...neither simple nor uniformly edifying. For anyone hoping for happiness, or political wisdom, or salvation, philosophical self-examination seems in practice to have led to self-doubt as often as self-trust, to misery as often as joy, to reckless public acts as often as prudent political conduct, and to moments of self-inflicted torment as often as moments of saving grace.
Miller also raises questions about historical and cultural determinants of the examined life:
At the start of the twenty-first century, we lack the specific spiritual resources and cultural contexts that made feasible the characteristic nineteenth-century quests of Emerson and Nietzsche – never mind the early modern lives of Montaigne and Descartes, or such ancient exemplars as Socrates, Plato, Seneca, and Augustine.
It is certainly difficult to picture the examined life in our times. What might it look like? How is it possible? Where might it take place? Has the committed philosophical quest for self-knowledge and wisdom been replaced by intermittent self-healing binges framed within the narratives of psychoanalysis, psychology, and more esoteric spiritualities? At a time when psychoanalytic and psychological interpretations have woven their way into the deepest structures of our self-(mis)understanding, we may ask who would be crazy enough to embark on a seemingly endless quest with no certain rewards based on beliefs and values which may well be little more than elaborate defence mechanisms or evolutionary adaptations rooted in our propensity for narcissism, hunger for power and seemingly limitless capacity for self-deception?
The foundations necessary for embarking on any committed philosophical journey of self-discovery have, it seems, never been frailer.
Jacob Cooper came to philosophy through Nietzsche and tries to live a philosophical life (while constantly becoming aware of how challenging this is!).
Ending
For now, The Philosopher remains unfunded and relies on your support to keep going, pay our contributors, and so on. Please consider becoming a supporter via Patreon or offering a one-off/monthly/annual donation.
I am heading back to New Haven today and am looking forward to getting started with the spring event series in a couple of days! Wishing you all a lovely Sunday, wherever you are.
Anthony Morgan
Editor