glass house philosopher / notebook 2
Sunday, 14th August 2005
Synchronicity. The last two weeks seemed to have been designed to test my stubborn belief that there is no-one up there testing me out, setting challenges for me. As a philosopher, I know that 'coincidence is what it is, and not another thing'. Coincidences just happen. But human beings love to weave stories around coincidences to show why they were not accidental but necessary which, of course, with the benefit of hindsight when we tell ourselves the story of 'My Life' they are.
On Thursday, a student query led me to look at the Prospectus for Undergraduate Study in Humanities from the University of London External Programme. The Course Director for BA Philosophy and Diploma in Philosophy, Sam Guttenplan, joined the Department at Birkbeck College London when I was in my final year there as an undergraduate in 19756. On page 35 there is a 'Message from Samuel Guttenplan' for prospective students, along with his photo, looking searchingly into the camera lens:
Philosophy has a reputation for both difficulty and depth. It is renowned for pursuing questions into the thickest undergrowth of argument and counter-argument, and many think of philosophical questions as having a special and even mysterious profundity.
Whilst there is certainly a basis to this reputation, it has often been exaggerated. There are features to the study of philosophy in the analytic tradition the tradition within which our programme is located that make it a particularly good training for virtually any professional career. For central to the study of philosophy are the abilities to reason and to assess the reasoning of others...
It was the photograph that caught me, rather than the words, which I had read before. I thought of the time that had passed. Where has it gone? After a few moments I put the prospectus down and clicked my email button an action which I do so many times during the day I hardly think about it. To my amazement, there was an email from Sam Guttenplan. It must have been at least a year or two since we last exchanged emails:
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 16:14:29 +0100
Subject: Congratulations are in order
From: Samuel Guttenplan
To: Geoffrey Klempner
I have been meaning to write to you about your Pathways in Philosophy programme and its involvement with the London External BA and Diploma courses. It was apparent to examiners (and to me as Chair of the Board of Examiners) that the level of performance reached by a number of students was particularly high. Loath to admit that students studying on their own could match or exceed those studying at Birkbeck (in the internal BA), I believe I am right in attributing a good part of the success of these students to your programme. For that, and for your general support of the programme, I congratulate you. I do hope the whole of the Pathways programme is going well and will continue to thrive.
Best wishes, Sam
Reader in Philosophy
London WC1E 7HX, United Kingdom
I had been feeling rather despondent at the apparently low work-rate of my students taking the BA and Diploma with Pathways support. Obviously, they must have been doing their homework after all. The email from Sam Guttenplan could not have come at a better time. I wrote back immediately, thanking him. In his reply, Sam said, 'I do rather like your site: I hadn't visited it for a while, but it is lively and sensitive at the same time. I do hope that it is flourishing enough to keep you at it. You are probably doing more for philosophy than most members of philosophy departments.'
But it was an email I received a week earlier that has really shaken me:
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2005 17:18:17 +0200
Subject: Summit for the Future 2006
From: Felix Bopp
To: Geoffrey Klempner
The Summit for the Future 2006, a global event, takes place in May 3-5, 2006 in Amsterdam and is an initiative of the Club of Amsterdam.
The general topic is: 'Ready to Take Risks?'
We would like to invite you as a 'Catalyst' participating as Philosopher in the Knowledge Stream about the future of Corporate Governance. See attached draft program...
Your input is:
Till mid August: bio [approx. 100 words], title, company/ institute and picture.
1. Active participation in the Knowledge Stream Session 1 & 2: Corporate Governance.
2. Session 3: Meeting with the Philosophers from the other streams, exchange of viewpoints. Preparation for a 30 minute presentation during Session 4. This can be a panel discussion, interactive presentation, theatre etc... it shouldn't be boring.
3. Session 4: 30 minutes presentation of your 'Catalyst Group Philosophers'.
2 weeks after the Summit: 1-3 pages written thoughts [not a summary] related to the knowledge stream and the Summit in general for inclusion in the Summit for the Future 2006 Report.
I'm looking forward to your feedback. It would be a pleasure if you could accept our invitation.
It took me a while to take this in. Felix Bopp's name was not unfamiliar to me. He is involved with the internet business networking resource OpenBC which I joined in June at the invitation of Felix Bopp not thinking any more of it.
I looked at the 190 page report from Summit for the Future 2005. One of the participating philosophers was Julian Baggini, editor of The Philosophers Magazine who writes in his afterword to the Trade/ Service Industry Knowledge stream:The role of the philosopher in all this is perhaps not as great as some philosophers would wish. The main job that I think a philosopher can do for businesses and organisations is to help give content and depth to ideas and concepts that often stand as little more than placeholders for things we don't really understand: good, just, fair, preferred, sustainable, respectful, inference, deduction, values, rationality. Philosophers can help the people who use these ideas without fully understanding them to get a better grip on them. Philosophers can't just tell you how to run things better, but by giving your thinking a thorough examination, they can help you to do that for yourself.
The subtitle for the 2006 Summit is, 'Ready to take risks?'
'Risk' is exactly one of the kinds of words Julian Baggini is talking about. What is it to take a risk? More specifically, in the context of any enterprise which we are considering undertaking, what is it that we risk?
Money, reputation. These are two obvious things that you risk losing if your enterprise goes pear-shaped. You can risk embarrassment, or censure, your health, your sanity. Or all together. But that only touches the externals. If the promise of reward is high enough, then the risk is worth taking. If not, not. That is simple, straightforward means-and-ends-rationality. But the most important decisions that we take are not always like this. And I'm thinking of the decision about my future that I face, coincidentally, just at this very moment.
For the enterprise I am considering, I have to risk some money not for the Amsterdam conference which is all expenses paid but not so much as would make me overly nervous. There's the risk of failure, which would be embarrassing. But failure is part of life. We learn from our failures. Better to have a go, and fail, then not try at all. I'm not thinking of that either. (I'm not denying that there is a huge amount of anxiety associated with the fear of failure. 'It shouldn't be boring' is the bit in Felix Bopp's email that most scares me.)
Socrates said, 'Know thyself'. It is great if you feel that you know yourself. (Better still if you are correct!) Most of us would be happy to be working towards self-knowledge or at least going in the right direction. I am a philosopher. Truth-seeking, more than anything else, is what turns me on. Why that should be I don't really know. It would be interesting to find out. But is what I have just said really true? Is it truth that I am really after, or something else? Why put myself on this stage, exposing myself to all manner of 'risks', if I could seek truth much more safely and, probably, much more efficiently in some little philosophy department somewhere? Could it be, after all, that there is something I want more than I want truth?
When you put yourself to the test, there's two things you can risk which don't fall under any of the headings mentioned above. You can risk finding out the real truth about yourself, the truth you didn't want to learn. Or you can risk losing your way in the search for self-knowledge. Both of these things I fear. I don't know which is worse.
Send me an Email
Ask a Philosopher!