Earlier this year (in February) I was fortunate enough to present some of my work in St. Louis at the central meeting of the APA. Before I left, I asked (on social media) if any philosophers would be heading down to Ferguson to take part in the protest or to lend a hand more generally, no one responded. Now, things were much more civil in Ferguson by this time (compared to what was going on there between August to December of 2014) so I had assumed that some would be making the 15 minute trek from the hotel where the conference was being held. I’m not sure why I thought this, maybe I’ve been assuming (without much evidence) that philosophers cared about these issues and felt compelled to take part in eschewing the practices that put innocent lives at risk (actions by both government and citizens). If a group of philosophers did make the trek, I was unaware. I had wanted to go but I didn’t want to go alone, so I didn’t. Instead I spent my time getting to know folks in my field by eating and drinking in lobbies and good restaurants. This is not to say that I didn’t enjoy this, but it got me to thinking about our role in society as philosophers more generally. In this post I’d like to discuss that role as it is currently practiced as well as how I think it should be practiced. I’m sure many will disagree and I would like to hear from those who view our discipline differently than I do as your views might help me to feel a bit better about things.
What is our role as philosophers? Is it only to teach what we set out to teach in our syllabus? Is it to get students (and only students) to think critically about their views and their actions? Does our role extend outside the classroom at all? How about outside of the academy more generally? Do we have an obligation to engage, to some degree, with popular media, current events, with social media, etc.? I know, lots of questions here but these questions have been generating a disdain for the profession as of late. When I sign a contract to teach, and when I signed my contract to do my PhD, it said nothing of public discourse. It mentioned the expectations of teaching and of committee work (when applicable). This suggests that our role is to teach our students and serve our institution in whatever administrative capacity as outlined in our contract. I think we ought to do more, at least those philosophers who engage with issues that are relevant to society at large. So, it seems that I am singling out political philosophers, ethicists, and social epistemologists. Though I’m open to extend this obligation to others as well.
My take is that to be a philosopher is to be more than a philosophy prof. I think that we do have an obligation to engage publicly about the issues we think about on a daily basis. If we believe that what we are doing has any practical import to the real world, then I claim that we have an obligation to share our thoughts, at least some of them, with the outside world. We are lucky and fortunate enough to be paid to think hard about topics that affect the lives of many people. For instance, the topic of punishment; Recently, a jury decided that Boston Marathon bomber, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, should die from lethal injection for detonating the bombs that killed 3 people and injured over 100 more. I’ve thought long and hard about the death penalty, I find it barbaric and I find most of the arguments in it’s favor to be some of the worst I have read on any topic. I’m sure many have seen something about this case in their social media news feed. I’ve likely seen more than most given that I am a Massachusetts native but I’m sure we all have seen our fill. When I see some of these arguments in support of the death penalty I can’t help but shake my head. But I think that I should do more than that. I should engage, as much as I can without negatively affecting my life plans, with these bad arguments and unwarranted conclusions. So I did post a little something myself (reluctantly), I posted a quick thought about the death penalty. My post read “Death penalty, huh?! I thought we were living in a civilized society.” As expected, this generated a bunch of comments, they included “Off with his head”, “I hope they kill him in the slowest and most painful way possible”, and a bunch of others, some of which at least attempted to explain why the death penalty might be justified in this case with more than mere assertion. Now, of course I could have been working on my dissertation instead of posting on FB, or working on that publication I need to gain employment, but I also think that I have an obligation to dispel some of the clear cut cases of bad argumentation I see on social media, I’m not not even a professional philosopher yet. I’m not saying that philosophers ought to dispel *all* the bad arguments we see, or that we should be policing the internet 24/7. Rather, I do believe that we should all be giving our point of view when time permits. After all, we are paid to think about these topics and engage with them regularly. Who is in a better position to engage about these matters? And, if we want our society to think critically about their views on topics and policies that affect us all (many philosophers share this desire), then it seems that we have some obligation to engage with society at large about these topics to help produce that outcome. This engagement might take the form of going to ground zero when these issues are being discussed (Ferguson) or, putting forth our views on social media or in the blogosphere where more folks can read and engage with them, whether they agree or not. Minimally, we should be linking others to our work on these issues so it’s available to them without too much effort. Am I just off on this? Should we not give a shit? Why not have those with a PhD take an oath as we do MD’s? For those of us with PhD’s, it seems that we ought to be using our expertise to enact societal change. When MD’s begin their practice they take an oath to help people, why shouldn’t we? We can’t help those who suffer from cancer to regain their health but we can help those who give invalid or unsound arguments. When their views about policy (policies that affect us all) are grounded in these bad arguments it seems that we should point this out, at least indirectly by posting our work or the work of others in the social stratosphere. Just like Md’s who treat their patients, we can’t help them all, but we can try our best to help those who have a fighting chance.
So, how do others feel about this? Is our job only to teach those who are fortunate enough to take a philosophy course or does our obligation extend outside the classroom? Am I alone in thinking we ought to have a presence in various news and media circles when major issues arise in our society? Or, should we watch from afar and shake our heads at how absurd the arguments are that many of our fellow citizens are putting forward?
A Philosopher's Take 
Garret Merriam
May 18, 2015
I’ve seen questions like this posed as a virtual debate between Marx and Wittgenstein. Marx held that the point of philosophy (or rather, intellectual work in general) is to change the word; Wittgenstein held that the point was to change yourself.
It’s something of a false dilemma of course. There’s no reason that we can’t do both, or that we can’t be obliged to do both. But if we accept the dilemma at face value, I have to side with Wittgenstein. I didn’t go into this line of work to fix the world. If that had been my motivation, I would have probably become a social worker (like my wife). Rather, I signed up to do this because I want to understand how things work. I hope I can share such understanding, and that it will in turn help improve the world, but that is not what I’m here for.
I don’t think the point is to change the world. I think the point is to know yourself.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Justin Caouette
May 19, 2015
The point of doing philosophy is much different than the point of being a professional philosopher. The latter entails further obligations than the former, or so I suggest. I take it that the debate between Marx and Wittgenstein was about doing philosophy more generally.
Now, I take your point that you didn’t get into this line of work to change the world, neither did I. But given that engaging with larger society doesn’t take too much effort it doesn’t seem like much to ask given how cushy our jobs are and how fortunate we are to do this for a living, that we contribute to society outside of the classroom. That’s all I am saying.
LikeLike
George Kassimis
May 19, 2015
I don’t think it’s a question. Of course philosophers should be out there more. To suggest otherwise would be pretentious as hell. And this is a huge problem with philosophy, that it can get so insular within the Ivory Tower. (And we wonder why there’s a diversity problem.)
AND OUR ACADEMIC WORK SUFFERS insulated in that tower. The armchair is great, but that can become a bubble real quick, and with the bubble gets warped, lame, or even half-baked views. And believe me, I know about half-baked views.
The only thing is, I think, a lot of philosophers aren’t well equipped to talk with the outside world. I know my family rolls their eyes at every bit of analysis I try to put out there at the dinner table, and I saw your FB post (in my bad attempt to make my point in a satirical manner), and a lot of the backlash was pushback against analysis. Like, we do need to trick them into getting them to think critically. But we aren’t socially clever enough to do that. I’m trying to, personally, but it’s hard.
You know, I said a few weeks ago, in order to needle philosophers, that my then-favorite comedian (which was saying a lot since I’m such a comedy snob) was better at saying ideas than any philosophers I’ve read. Now, other circumstances the past two days have led me to consider said comedian dead. But I meant it then, and the sentiment is still there toward our profession. I used that comedian’s bits over and over again, and it helped get my students thinking critically.
And that’s a problem. Philosophers are supposed to uphold, to me, two things: clarity and self-awareness. That’s something that all people probably also really want. But when an entertainer who is about to have a huge fall from grace can convey that to more people than philosophers can, we gots a serious problem, yo.
LikeLike
Justin Caouette
May 19, 2015
Word! Re: your point about philosophers not being well equipped to talk with the outside world, well, I think that ability comes in degrees. The philosopher who is incapable isn’t obligated. BUt that same philosopher might be obligated to share her work on twitter or some other avenue. The obligations will differ from person to person. My point is only that we might have obligations outside of the classroom.
LikeLike
George Kassimis
May 19, 2015
Right. I would have added a clarification, but my comment was already long.
I think that there are many people who naturally lack social skills, and we honestly have a long way to go to realize that. We might be a society that is unfairly skewed toward being outgoing. So, if it’s many in the set of all people, then that includes philosophers (perhaps…probably even me). Like I could never go out and protest because that situation has anxiety written all over it for me, personally.
But, at the same time, you can’t tell me that a lot our inability to talk to the outside world doesn’t include pretentiousness as a cause. There’s a lot of philosophers with turned up noses (probs the majority, though hopefully older). And that’s got to go. You can’t be that and be a philosopher at the same time. It goes against everything we’re supposed to stand for.
LikeLike
Menoeceus
May 22, 2015
Bertrand Russell got involved after making his mark in mathematical logic. First, he found inconsistencies, e.g., in Frege’s arguments before turning to social issues. He was right to shift his attention, I think, and not retire to some institute (like Gödel). But he was not especially respected for his decision, either inside or outside academic philosophy. On the other hand, his books sold pretty well. Of course, for inspiration, it always helps to read Plato’s Apology again, or Boethius’ Consolation. Just my view as a once would-be historian of philosophy.
LikeLike
Justin Caouette
May 22, 2015
Yeah, I often catch shit for thinking we, as philosophers, should be doing anything more than publish scholarly work in journals or get students to engage with the content of course materials. That said, there do seem to be a number of folks who are sympathetic to the view that we ought to do more in society as philosophers. Other folks aside, I find myself internally split as to how to go about forging a public identity as a philosopher so that I can be sought out to discuss the issues I think about every day with the media and with non-academics. Every time I see an interview on TV or on the radio with someone giving an argument for or against some policy or course of action taken by the state (or an individual) I can’t help but think that philosophers should be in on this. Now it’s true that some philosophers are sought ought for these sorts of things but my thought is that we should be actively seeking publicity on important social issues. I’m not saying that we should all take to the streets, after all we need to be in our offices and in seminars and in reading groups doing philosophy for a large portion of our time. But, it doesn’t take too much effort to get on twitter, or facebook, or klout, or whatever medium one finds appropriate to share our ideas and summarize our research. This seems to be a minimal obligation for those of us who are fortunate enough to get paid to spend our days thinking long and hard about these issues. Anyway, sorry for the rant but your response got me thinking about those folks who looked down on Russell and lost respect for him for changing gears.
LikeLike
Menoeceus
May 22, 2015
I was at the university for about 15 years, and the “real-world issue” that motivated academics on both sides more often and more visibly than any other was tenure. In my experience, it started with anthropologist Bill Allen at UCSB and ended with philosopher Barrington Jones at Princeton.
But doesn’t that show how ordinarily human academics are. We are all ultimately
self-interested, if only because we don’t really understand “issues” in a practical sense until they actually affect us where we live.
LikeLike
Bob
May 25, 2015
Great questions. “Never trust a philosopher who hasn’t been in jail” expresses my take on it. I remember being in philosophy classes at SFU back a century or so and noticing that not one philosopher was involved in or even talked about the social issues that were swirling about the campus.
That experience was one of the main reasons that when I had the opportunity I started the Institute of Practical Philosophy in Nanaimo.
LikeLike
Bob
May 25, 2015
Reblogged this on Episyllogism and commented:
Don’t be a by-stander!
LikeLike
Menoeceus
May 25, 2015
Hi Bob
It’s Chris. Small world.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Bob
May 26, 2015
Hello. What is new?
LikeLike
Tom Morris - www.tomvmorris.com
May 25, 2015
What a great topic to broach and absorb. We do need to be “out in the world” doing more. For me, it started with an invitation to speak to a Chamber of Commerce group in South Bend Indiana on Ethics, which I had never taught. I put together something, and most of the people at the talk invited me to their Kiwanis, or Rotary group, or their church, or real estate company, or bank to do the same talk. Then a car dealer asked me whether philosophers had ever addressed success. Ok, that’s not what they taught me at Yale, or what Phil Review was looking for, but let me check. Boom. That talk began to open doors. And I got so busy doing philosophy in public, I resigned as tenured full professor, just to see what was out there in the culture that I could do something about. That was 20 years ago this summer. So, fellow philosopher, be bold. If you feel the itch to serve more broadly scratch it. Unimaginable adventures await!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Justin Caouette
May 25, 2015
Thanks for sharing your story and for the advice, Tom! Where were you tenured before giving it up?
LikeLike
tomvmorris
May 26, 2015
University of Notre Dame, Department of Philosophy. It was a great place for my specialty at the time, analytic philosophy of religion and philosophical theology. I got to pioneer new stuff in the field for nearly 15 years, but then felt a deep sense that it was time for a new adventure!
LikeLike
tomvmorris
May 26, 2015
I wrote in my academic years as Thomas V Morris.
LikeLike