Masthead Logo The Iowa Review Volume 19 Article 18 Issue 2 Spring-Summer 1989 Why Philosophy? Simon Blackburn Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.uiowa.edu/iowareview Part of the Creative Writing Commons Recommended Citation Blackburn, Simon. "Why Philosophy?." The Iowa Review 19.2 (1989): 91-104. Web. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17077/0021-065X.3748 This Contents is brought to you for free and open access by Iowa Research Online. It has been accepted for inclusion in The oI wa Review by an authorized administrator of Iowa Research Online. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Why Philosophy? Simon Blackburn IT ISA GREAT HONOUR to be invited to give this lecture on this topic. The honour was not lessened by my first reflection. This was that the lecture was bound to be either unnecessary, or ineffectual. Unneces an sary, because in the United States there is still admirable background now coun respect for liberal and humane studies that is vanishing in my too try. Or at least, if you feel this is optimistic, there will be this respect as in people who arrange and attend such lectures this. Many of you will in no more or feel your bones that philosophy needs explanation defence art. than other components of the good civilized life: music, literature, Although I hope such people do not all leave at this point, I confess that not they will need my lecture. On the other hand if, in spite of this back are ground respect, there others who think that the practise of philosophy to a on is akin the practise of sorcery, confidence trick played universities too to a or a by people lazy go into library laboratory?then I fear Iwill not convert them. But I hasten to add that this is not my fault. I do not think you are con to art or or are verted the value of music literature by lectures either. You an drawn into understanding of their value by looking, listening, reading, to and practising. After you do that, you begin find that your life would or not be impoverished by their absence, whether you had noticed that be fore. It is no different with philosophy, which is only appreciatedby prac am tising it, doing it, living with it. Not, I afraid, by hearing people like me talk about it. An hour spent trying?really trying?to reconcile free will with determinism, or to refute Hume on miracles, or to understand sees same why you think your neighbour colours the way that you do, would be far better. Of course, some amongst yo? may have no inclina to an tion spend hour doing these things. Perhaps you suffer from philos common more ophy blindness. Since this defect is quite it is respectable than other kinds of blindness. In any case it shares with them the property cannot that it be cured by lectures. to was or Having proved myself that my lecture either unnecessary ir a relevant, I should perhaps have withdrawn. But being philosopher, I to on on started reflect my proof, and the real problems of explaining and defending the activity itself. I found this a useful thing to do, and then I 91 University of Iowa is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve, and extend access to The Iowa Review ® www.jstor.org to think I it an began that if found interesting, perhaps there would be audience to which would also like hear it. So my proof collapsed! There must an be audience who might be interested in following the matter fur ther: there could be a lecture after all. And here it is. a to a Why Philosophy? There is well-known reply question of this to form supposed have been given by the Dean of Christchurch, Oxford, in the nineteenth Dean was a century. Gaisford asked by visiting lady was the of what value Classical Studies. "Madam," he replied, "it elevates above the common herd, it enables us to read the word of our Saviour in not to the original Greek, and it infrequently leads positions of consider able both in this life in is to emolument, and that which come." Snobbery, an a so historical mistake, and complacent acceptance of self-confirming norms to a cial according which those of classical education got paid more, at in to come. least Victorian Britain, and hence probably in the life Can we not a do better, necessarily in defending classical education, but in de fending philosophy? As a I a I to preliminary should say little about what take philosophy be. The is not. public perception partly flattering, and partly The flattering part is the attribution of wisdom, of lofty disdain for the trivialities of life. The unflattering part is that this is all there is to it. Both sides are encapsu in an were a lated apocryphal conversation. Two people gossiping about misfortune one of them had suffered, and the friend consoled the other to with the remark, "Well dear, you've got be philosophical?just don't think it." can to it about One point philosophy: is the practise of thinking ? occur about certain specific questions those that in the curricula. Some of are to not these natural everyone: why is there something and nothing? we are How should live? What does it all mean? Some highly abstract: are what ismind? matter? reason? truth? What numbers? thoughts? laws one true are of nature? What makes opinion and another false? Some quite can we sense specific: make of free will, self-deception, rights, obliga tions? The lists can be constructed, but the trouble with this kind of answer it to us a to on is that does nothing tell why question gets be the or it It to list, whether indeed should be there. fails say, for example, why are in as as questions about mind addressed philosophy departments well in or ac psychology departments, why the rights and wrongs of particular as or are tions, such euthanasia abortion, found discussed by philosophers as as common well by lawyers. What is the denominator? 92 answer a The is that in philosophical discussion the topic shifts in char sense. acteristic way. The shift is self-reflective in the following A normal use discussion will take certain categories of thought for granted. It will as a seen. them lens through which the topic is Philosophy begins when or the properties of the lenses themselves become the topic, in other words we to on we are con when begin reflect the very categories through which our reason ducting thinking. An ordinary discussion, whether, say, it is can able to do A rather than B, ignore the question of what makes one decision reasonable and another not: it is when this category is examined starts. can that philosophy A mathematician proceed using well-known we starting points and well-established procedures of proof; but it iswhen or ones ask what makes these axioms these proof procedures good that the starts. philosophy of mathematics This is why philosophy is characteris a ever more tically process of raising abstract issues. The question, say, of common to what if anything is proof in ethics and in mathematics rapidly counts as raises the question of what proof anywhere, and in distinguish mean we soon na ing out things that this might find questions about the ture of truth and the nature of meaning. This is not to say that the drive towards abstraction is inevitable: indeed it requires great philosophical to to are skill know when it is unwise raise the further questions. But they return to some always lurking in the background. I shall consequences of serves this sketch of the activity before the end. Meanwhile, supposing it to a stance we locate characteristic philosophical and attitude, why should encourage it? on cun I begin my discourse this question ?for with true philosopher's not so as to an move ning I do go far call it answer?by making the natural a of distinguishing between low, pragmatic defence of philosophical activ a same. to ity, and high, idealistic defence of the The low defence tries an means to show that such activity is efficient other things that we value: or to or to to clarity of mind, flexibility of approach problems, other skills our most to and abilities that society values. This is the line easily used per suade Deans and Governments that philosophical education should be sup a ported. I believe recent director of the CIA testified in the New York to were Times that the qualities which led him that particular summit fos at tered by reading Philosophy, Politics, and Economics Oxford. Someone to who sticks with this line may take the value of these other things, a more which philosophy is means, for granted. Or, likely, he will imag 93 or ine clarity flexibility of mind as itself useful for other purposes: perhaps for the defence of and the life, liberty, pursuit of happiness. Living securely and happily demands skills; if the pursuit of philosophy seems to help in some the acquisition of of those skills, then it gains a derivative value as a means to something good. is in There much this argument. Philosophical education is, I believe, to are well-adapted nurture abilities which needed in many other activi ties. cut on Young persons who have their teeth philosophical problems of are rationality, knowledge, perception, free will; other minds well-placed to think better about of problems evidence, decision-making, responsibil ity, ethics, that theywill be called upon to dealwith in later life.