People don't need to understand Aristotelian ethics to understand virtues. And whether or not we accept Aristotle's account, I believe the the concept of "virtue" to be a useful one. Using this model, I've compiled a preliminary list of virtues which are seen as central in being a good philosopher, but which I also believe to be important social values which have been largely lost. Like Aristotle's virtues, these of course need to be cultivated in moderation. I've indicated three which I find important. However these are meant to indicate a more holistic conception of what a good philosopher looks like. The distinctions therefore will not be hard and fast but loose and general with certain ideas overlapping. The three discussed in this first post are related in that they defend against bias; both from ourselves and from others.
Humility
Rene Descartes' "Meditations on First Philosophy" is one of the most famous works from the period of modern philosophy. Descartes makes his project to essentially subject his entire system of beliefs to a rigorous methodological skepticism by examining each belief in turn and disregarding those which are not absolutely certain. What is left is very minimal. All of his sense perceptions, memories and beliefs about the external world are all found to be less than certain. In fact the only thing which can always be demonstrated as being certain is that as long as he is thinking, he must necessarily exist. This is the basis for the phrase "I think therefore, I am" or "cogito ergo sum" in Latin. While Descartes did not actually believe that he was being deceived about the nature of reality, he recognized that practically nothing is known with absolute certainty.
After a short period of time participating in philosophical inquiry, anyone will quickly discover that Descartes is right. There are very few things, especially in philosophy, that are known with certainty. In general, our understanding of the world becomes more complex and uncertain the closer we examine it. Thus philosophers learn to maintain a sort of balancing act. To make intellectual progress, we can't expect to be certain and need to be satisfied with a level of probability. On the other hand we need to be constantly re-evaluating our conclusions and the reasons for them. This requires that we be grounded and maintain humility by recognizing that as individual people, our understanding will be limited in many ways. Taking truth seriously means calling yourself (as well as others) out on bullshit arguments and flawed reasoning. This requires one to be fearless in approaching deeply held beliefs, which leads to my next virtue.
Emotional detachment
By its very nature, philosophical inquiry will challenge beliefs which are embedded in our individual perceptions of the world. This is true of all its sub fields, but perhaps most noticeably in ethics. Its no surprise, therefore that people who don't spend much of their time doing philosophy will be inclined to react strongly to ideas in which they have a strong emotional investment. This will lead otherwise reasonable people express much more extreme views than they would under conditions of objectivity. For instance, two people debating the ethicality of abortion might share the view that there are some instances where abortion is justified and others where it is not, while disagreeing about exactly when. Yet if the discussion were to escalate in the way that most heated debates do, the opposing positions would become much more polarized simply because the parties will begin to feel that they are being personally attacked, rather than simply the view which they are defending. When people feel like they are being attacked, they become defensive and the discussion becomes a fight. They will forget the subtlety of their arguments and instead put up the most extreme defense possible. The two arguing over abortion will quickly lose sight of the closeness of their views and instead assume polarized positions under the banner "pro-life" or "pro-choice."
I don't mean to imply that people don't really have (sometimes radically) differing views. On the contrary, philosophers will often fail to see eye to eye on very fundamental issues. But good philosophers acknowledge that each perspective general will have certain strengths and weakness. Nor do I mean to imply that its necessarily a bad thing to have extreme views. However, one must constantly reassess his views and ask "Is my position the product of reasoned deliberation? Or am I just reacting to a position emotionally? Or without serious consideration?" Most people aren't in this habit. It seems to be a product of a society which lets people believe that their opinions are okay no matter how unfounded or unjustified. Intellectual laziness is a concern that has wide ranging implications; not the least of which that it turns reasoned debates into shouting matches. Thus I believe that every day people can gain a lot from cultivating this particular virtue.
One last point - I do not mean to imply that there is necessarily something wrong with being emotionally invested in a belief. Authenticity and commitment are virtues which have their own kind of value. I simply mean that in philosophical, as well as every day deliberation, failing to acknowledge that emotional attachment can skew one's perceptions of the issue can lead to a position which is not the product of an impartial observer committed to discovering truth but one who has a vested interest in the outcome.
Charity
The project of truth requires objectivity, which in turn requires both emotional detachment and a willingness to listen and take seriously the views of others. Kantian ethics describes people as rational moral agents, capable of having a conception of what is valuable and pursuing it, while acknowledging and respecting that others will have differing but still reasonable conceptions of their own. Respecting people as "project pursuers" in the language of Thomas Hill, means that we can't simply write off their ends, and must generally allow for their free pursuit without interference. Humans are uniquely valuable because of their ability to use rationality and this imposes a requirement for respect.
Like Aristotle, we do not need to endorse the Kantian position to take something of value away from it. The argument for respecting someone else's viewpoint can be extended to public deliberation in general. Just as human reason allows for different conceptions of the good to flourish in each individual, it also allows for different explanations and ideas which contribute to deliberation in general. Taking seriously the views of others is an important part of the project of truth. Respect also has a more practical function in terms of objectivity. Being objective requires being open minded as to possible flaws in our arguments and chains of reasoning. Taking opposing views seriously could help in finding these flaws and adding important insights which we fail to see initially. Therefore, it is important to give an argument the most charitable possible interpretation possible; which means we should make our focus to examine and deliberate the major argument which the other person is attempting to convey, rather than picking at small problems which are not necessarily crucial. Obviously we shouldn't take this to the extreme of failing to pick out real flaws in the argument. The goal is to give the best possible argument for a position and see where it goes wrong, without bias or prejudice.
This is list is, of course, preliminary and only meant to indicate a few aspects of the ideal philosopher related to objectivity. I have tried to show that these virtues not only aid in philosophical deliberation but also have more practical implications as well. My hope is that people will take these seriously and make an effort to notice when they are reasoning or debating in a biased way. I hope to expand on other philosophical virtues in future posts. But for now, this should give you something to chew on.
Further Reading:
Aristotle - Nichomachean Ethics
Descartes - Meditations On First Philosophy
Kant - Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals
*All of these are classics and available for free at various locations on the internet.
No comments:
Post a Comment