You Be the Judge (If You Feel Like It)
This Is What a Great Thinker Looks Like
Today I thought we’d have a little writing contest. We’re the judges. The contestants will be philosophers. I suppose we can judge them both on the quality of their writing and their ideas. Of course, some ideas are easier to cull and enjoy than others.
“That is why it is so hard to be good; for it is always hard to find the mean in anything; it is not everyone but only a man of science who can find the mean or center of a circle. So too anybody can get angry—that is easy—and anybody can give or spend money, but to give it to the right person, to give the right amount of it, at the right time, for the right cause and in the right way, this is not what anybody can do, nor is it easy. That is why goodness is rare and praiseworthy and noble.”
–Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, Book 2, Chapter 9
“To be beneficent when we can is a duty; and besides this, there are many minds so sympathetically constituted that, without any other motive of vanity of self-interest, they find a pleasure in spreading joy around them, and can take delight in the satisfaction of others so far as it is their own work. But I maintain that in such a case an action of this kind, however proper, however amiable it may be, has nevertheless no true moral worth, but is on a level with other inclinations, e.g. the inclination to honour, with, if it is happily directed to that which is in fact of public utility and accordant with duty, and consequently honourable, deserves praise and encouragement, but not esteem.”
–Kant, Foundations of the Metaphysic of Morals, “The First Proposition of Morality”
“Liberality in princes is regarded as a mark of beneficence, but when it occurs, that the homely bread of the honest and industrious is often thereby converted into delicious cates for the idle and the prodigal, we soon retract our heedless praises. The regrets of a prince, for having lost a day, were noble and generous: but had he intended to have spent it in acts of generosity to his greedy courtiers, it was better lost than misemployed after that manner.”
–Hume, An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals, Part 2
”We must think through the reasons for this and resist all sentimental frailty: life itself in its essence means appropriating, injuring, overpowering those who are foreign and weaker; oppression, harshness, forcing one.s own forms on others, incorporation, and at the very least, at the very mildest, exploitation . but why should we keep using this kind of language, that has from time immemorial been infused with a slanderous intent? Even that social body whose individuals, as we have just assumed above, treat one another as equals (this happens in every healthy aristocracy) must itself, if the body is vital and not moribund, do to other bodies everything that the individuals within it refrain from doing to one another: it will have to be the will to power incarnate, it will want to grow, to reach out around itself, pull towards itself, gain the upper hand . not out of some morality or immorality, but because it is alive, and because life simply is the will to power.”
–Neitzsche, Beyond Good and Evil, Section 259
“It is the observation of some particular want—some particular instance of distress—that gives birth to that pain of sympathy, which can no otherwise obtain relief than by the idea of the cessation of the suffering thus witnessed or imagined. To be assured, that not only the condition of the object will upon the whole be meliorated by what is given, but meliorated in that particular way—meliorated by the removal of that very distress, to the idea of which the pain of commiseration and the consequent desire of affording relief owed its birth—such an assurance is not only the most suitable, but the only perfect satisfaction which that desire can receive.”
–Bentham, “Pauper Management”
What do you think? Whose writing might be most likely to inspire your respect? Your admiration? Who might you emulate? Or whose ideas might you choose to follow, perhaps partly as a result of his persuasive arts?
I dig the German folks the most, though I think Aristotle’s virtue ethics rock and are actually spot on in terms of defining character. (They aren’t that practically useful though.)
As for Kant, I just taught my students a bit about the categorical imperative (sounds like a math-rock band name).
Of course, every time I think of Freddy N., I think of exclamation points (he uses more than other writer I’ve ever read). I also think of this:
http://www.philosophersguild.com/index.lasso?page_mode=Product_Detail&item=0131
I think that 20th century gritty emotional lunging, that emotional drive we looked for in so many WS slush pieces owes a large part of its ancestry to Neitszche. As a writer I’m constantly jealous he got to make the announcement that God is dead. What a thing to have on your CV! A lot of exclamation points, I know, but Kant is such a bore. and a racist. And he never left his home town.
One guy left off this list that would certainly be up in the ranks in terms of writing ability is Ludwig Wittgenstein. His bio is fantastic too.
Ooh, maybe an entire blog post needs to be devoted to Wittgenstein. Thanks for the tip, Ox!
Brett! I was hoping you would participate in the judging. I love the Will to Power Bar. Have you ever eaten one? Did it help? I’d love to know what other philosophy-related things you do with your students. What are you teaching and where?
The Will to Power Bar didn’t help with my muscular development, however it did give me an instant mustache.
As for philosophy of fun, I’m just about to wrap up teaching a Critical Thinking course at a local career college (Herzing University). I’m taking a semester off as I’ve got wedding shenanigans to deal with, but I’ll be teaching a short research course in November or so.
I’m glad to hear you are teaching. Critical thinking and research both sound fun.
I pick Aristotle. He doesn’t seem like he’s ‘trying too hard’. The rest seem kind of ‘constipated’.
Shanti, I love you assessment. Aristotle really had it going on.
I vote for Aristotle as well. Sounds like a plug for the Middle Path. I certainly struggle with the issues he described. I find staying in touch with God helps, as does reading Pema Chodron.
I wonder how Aristotle discovered his inner Buddha.
I too pick Aristotle, but only because he occurs in physics books more often than the others. Also, I like that his quote contains “man of science,” although I prefer “person of science” myself. :-)
Fun post Shira!