JUST PHILOSOPHIZING

THOUGH PH.D. TRANSLATES INTO Doctorate in Philosophy, I confess my own degree never represented much knowledge of philosophy per se. Somehow the subject was too dense, too filled with arcane isms. By contrast, mathematics was logical and elegant, especially the area I settled into, dynamical systems theory, sort of differential equations without the dirty bits. 

This is all preface to philosophy presented recently in London Review of Books in “Quadruple Tremulo,” by Kieran Setiya, LRB, May 4, 2023. This article is a review of Philip Kitcher’s aptly titled What’s the Use of Philosophy?

IndieBound describes, “Philip Kitcher has taught for nearly half a century at several American Universities, most recently at Columbia University in the City of New York. His work has been honored with a number of awards, including the Rescher Medal for systematic philosophy, and the Hempel Award for lifetime achievement in the Philosophy of Science.” 

The website cites Susan Neiman: “The book pulls no punches in showing how far contemporary philosophy has diverged from its original goals … Yet Kitcher does not merely lament the ways in which philosophy has abandoned its traditional roles. With characteristic and sympathetic understanding, Kitcher provides a genealogy which shows how so many of philosophy’s virtues have turned into flaws…”

Gee, my kinda philosophy book. 

What’s more, the “Letters” department of LRB’s June 1, 2023, issue offers Kitcher’s response to Setiya’s occasionally thorny review of his book. Here are several tidbits from this lengthy response, replete with LRB’s characteristically erudite exposition.

A Stingy Balance Sheet. Kitcher writes, “Anyone who questions the current state of a well-established academic discipline is likely to be reprimanded for doing so. Empires have a tendency to strike back against rebels. So, I am grateful to Kieran Setiya for his forbearance in his review of my book What’s the Use of Philosophy? (LRB, 4 May). I appreciate his willingness to take account of places where my critique might be salutary, and not simply to concentrate on my errors. Even so, I think his balance sheet is too stingy.”

In particular, Kitcher notes: “My aim in writing the book was to urge philosophers to restore philosophy to its former important place in thought and culture. Once, I claim, works of serious philosophy influenced the thinking of many people in many walks of life. Setiya charges that this alleged golden age never existed, and asks pointedly when I suppose it to have occurred.”

Kitcher’s Trip Through Philosophy’s Golden Age: “Socrates forfeited his life because he was too influential on young Athenians. Aristotle’s ideas dominated European thought for centuries. Augustine’s writings shaped the religious culture of the Middle Ages.”

Kitcher continues, “Bacon, Descartes and Locke all contributed to the explosive growth of physical science in the 17th century. Like Hobbes before him, Locke also framed issues of the role and function of governments. Rousseau’s ideas had some effect on many late 18th-century citizens. Goethe saw Kant as illuminating the most difficult issues of the day and, through Coleridge, Kantian conceptions influenced moral reflections and educational arrangements in the Anglophone world.”

“Bentham inspired early 19th-century progressives in Britain,” Kitcher continues. “Mill was read by politicians and economists, including French socialists and Italian nationalists; George Eliot engaged with his ideas; and, after his death, William Gladstone canonised him as the ‘saint of rationality’. The post-Kantian Idealist movement, from Fichte to Hegel, shaped German thought about science, the arts, history and politics – this was the tradition from which Karl Marx emerged. Before Dewey became the person to be consulted on the issues of the day, his role in the United States had been anticipated by Emerson and William James.”

Whew. Talk about influencing many people. 

By Contrast. During the past sixty years, Kitcher says, “that long tradition of wide engagement and influence has declined…. Philosophy has turned inward, generating scores of articles whose topics are ‘A’s defense of Y-ism against B’s version of the Z-objection,’ filling the prominent journals that publish the work that confers professional status.” 

Instead. Kitcher concludes his LRB letter with, “Like Setiya, I love philosophy, and want to reform it not to abolish it. Perhaps pointing to the imperfections of the beloved is wounding, and I should apologise again for my lack of tact; but philosophy would be healthier if it got out more.”

To me, Kitcher adroitly sums up Philosophy 101, at least its essence without the “dirty bits”. ds 

© Dennis Simanaitis, SimanaitisSays.com, 2023