glass house philosopher / notebook 1
Sunday, 10th June 2001
The whole day to myself! June and the girls left at 7 am to go on a pilgrimage to Mary's shrine at Walsingham. As usual, I was drafted in to make the sandwiches.
My head was still feeling the wine after yesterday evening's birthday party for Jane, our neighbour. (I have to be careful what I say as she might be reading this!) Thirty-somethings high on beer and chocolate cake pogo danced to hits by the 80's rock group The Jam while kids tumbled around underfoot. I was not allowed to leave before I had graced the dance floor. That must have been quite a sight.
After I had helped pack the food, June and I waved our goodbyes, and I went straight back to bed.
Three hours later, refreshed after a second breakfast, I feel ready to do some work. Today is scheduled for my contributions to Ask a Philosopher. Four questions from Jim, Ryan, TK and Tom on the Twelfth page of questions and answers. Two of the questioners, Jim Poindexter and Ryan Smith are my own students. It's pretty rare that I get one, let alone two in one week.
I'm going to talk about Jim's question here:
There is no question that philosophy is relevant to our personal and civic lives, but the reality is this: The majority of people are cogs in the economic machines of the nations in which they live. Most people spend most of their time "making a living". So, if you are interested in promoting the study of philosophy not only inside of, but also outside of academia the following question must surely be of interest to you:
What specific jobs justify the time and money invested in an undergraduate degree in philosophy, or a Masters or Doctorate in philosophy?
By "justify" I mean, ideally, that the tools of a philosopher in logic and language, in the history of philosophy and religion, in epistemology and ontology would be indispensable tools in the work a person does. A minimal justification for studying philosophy would be, in my opinion, that training in the use of language and logic would be an indispensable tool in the work a person does.
It's pretty obvious to those that know me that work is an important thing in my life. There are easier ways of keeping body and soul together than running a philosophy school on the internet! (When I tell people what I do, I get the reaction, "You make a living from that?" Last night was no exception.) To keep Pathways to PhiIosophy on the road, I have to do a lot of jobs besides philosophy. Web designer, public relations officer, businessman. I don't resent the time away from my 'books'. On the contrary, I relish the challenge.
I have no time for people who say that all a philosophy degree teaches you to do is teach philosophy. That is a load of codswallop.
On a general level, which applies to all the different kinds of work that I do, the most important skill of the philosopher is the ability to turn familiar problems around and see them in new ways. Edward de Bono has found a ready niche in the market with his books on Lateral Thinking. Which would be fine if he had the humility to give due credit for where the ideas come from. Though vertical or logical thinking is important for the philosopher, no philosophy problem was ever solved by logic alone. Studying philosophy teaches you how to challenge basic presuppositions, to get out of ruts in your thinking. That is what philosophy is all about. There's nothing that de Bono could have taught Socrates or Plato.
On my bookshelves, I have Mark H. McCormack What They Don't Teach You at Harvard Business School and Eric G. Flamholz and Yvonne Randle The Inner Game of Management. I like to dip in. I read them as philosophy books, because that's what they are. The 'bottom line' is that business is about people: whether you are keeping a team together, or maintaining working relationships with partners and clients, or persuading potential clients that you have the solution to their needs.
Dealing with people is a problem of communication: how to put over your point persuasively and effectively; seeing things from the other person's perspective; learning how to listen when the other person has something important to say. Sure, there are management courses that teach those things. But we are talking about something more fundamental. It's not enough to learn a handful of techniques or rules of thumb. Philosophers see through that, just as Socrates saw through the 'How to win your law suit' instruction manuals peddled by the run of the mill sophists who couldn't hack it when it came to philosophy.
"How does philosophy help with web designing?" One of the reasons that the Pathways web sites don't look like thousands of others is that I avoid the 'painting by numbers' approach encouraged by the fancy web design programs. I work from the basics, in raw HTML. To get the effect that you are aiming for requires a disciplined, logical approach as well as the ability to keep the whole mentally in view, and not just the assembled parts. (It also helps if you've studied symbolic logic.)
On the subject of the Greek sophists: the last two units of the Pathways Ancient Philosophy program The First Philosophers are an appreciation of the contributions of the great sophists Gorgias and Protagoras. Gorgias doesn't fare too well in Plato's dialogue. Gorgias seemed rather contemptuous of philosophers, so I can understand why Plato was peeved. Protagoras gets much gets much better treatment in the dialogue dedicated to him. I am not the least bit embarrassed to describe myself as an 'internet sophist' in my philosophical life.
What I would now add, in support of the case I am making here, is that the art of rhetoric which Gorgias and Protagoras professed which no-one demonstrated better than Plato in his superbly constructed dialogues is the heart and soul of public relations. The public relations and advertising industries provide an excellent employment for philosophy graduates.
This is threatening to become self-indulgent. I think I'll leave Jim's question on the Questions page. Let's see what the others think!
Time to look at the other questions. But first, a mug of tea.
o O o
Several mugs of tea later I can't believe the time this has taken! June and the girls will be back soon. I don't think I have the mental energy to write any more. I'm shattered. Must be age creeping up on me.
As an epilogue, I thought I'd reproduce my answer to TK from the Twelfth page of questions and answers:Mathematicians and physicists generally do their most creative work early in their careers. Do philosophers suffer the same fate? Why? What does this mean then to a senior citizen recently interested in philosophy who has taken his shoe off to dip his foot in the Philosophy Lake only to quickly withdraw it finding that he had left his sock on?
The most notable case of a philosopher who only got into his creative stride in his 50's is Immanuel Kant, who published the first edition of the Critique of Pure Reason at the age of 57. Kant is by no means an exception to examples of the productivity of philosophers in their middle to advancing years. In view of the contrast with mathematicians and physicists, this is a fact which requires explanation.
There is no doubt that the loss of mental speed that arises with the passage of the years is a handicap in any intellectual discipline. The evidence seems to suggest that the loss of speed has the greatest negative effect on the ability to do creative work in mathematics, and disciplines which rely heavily on mathematics such as physics.
Philosophers are trained to follow the logic of arguments. That does require a certain mental agility. They are also called upon to exercise their powers of judgement. Now, to take a complex set of considerations for and against and make sense of it, to see the wood rather than being lost amongst the trees, is a quality prized in Judges. Age is not considered to be a handicap on the bench. One the contrary, we would be worried if Judges were appointed in their early 20's. Why should it be so surprising, therefore, if philosophers continue their creative output well into their advancing years?
Learners of retirement age have many advantages over students fresh out of high school. They have a lifetime of experience to call upon; a greater ability to question what they are taught and refuse to have the wool pulled over their eyes; the self-confidence that comes from having successfully navigated their course through life, despite the disappointments and setbacks that each one of us must face at some time or other. You have lots of things going for you. My advice is, don't worry about getting your socks wet. Wade in with your boots on!
Before I forget. A milestone was passed this week. I telephoned Avebury, publishers of my book Naive Metaphysics to find out about how the book had been selling recently. They said that there were just 32 copies left in stock and they had no plans to reprint. They agreed to let me have the copies free of charge provided I paid carriage costs. With the reversion of the publication rights to me, I am free to put the book on the web.
The Big Book, if it is ever going to come, has not come yet. I recognize that. Do I still have that book in me? I honestly don't know. I'm not sure that I really care whether it comes or not. Perhaps when I retire.
Send me an Email
Ask a Philosopher!