[lit-ideas] Re: The Medium is the Message
- From: Phil Enns <phil.enns@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: "Lit-Ideas@Freelists. Org" <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 09:27:16 -0400
Walter O. wrote:
"'Plato played by Walter O'?? Are we on the same planet?"
"Unlike Phil, I am not happy with my designated role and I demand satisfaction!"
Yeah, I saw that coming.
But, Walter, I would have thought you would be somewhat sympathetic to
Plato's argument about the well-ordered soul, with reason governing
the passions and the will. And I will bet that you have a grudging
respect for Trudeau, our former Canadian prime minister who tried to
be the philosopher king.
Which brings to mind a conversation I was part of a few days ago. The
conversation began with a flippant remark about how free will is
possible if there is a God, but quickly moved to a discussion of the
degree to which we know ourselves. My contribution, borrowed
shamelessly from Nietzsche, was that free will does not refer to a
capacity or ability, but rather to moral judgment. We attribute free
will to people as part of holding them responsible for their actions,
and to those who we don't hold responsible, we consider them to either
not have a fully developed will, for example children, or have a will
that is not free, for example the insane. While this may sound like a
capacity, I argued that it wasn't in part because we don't attribute
free will without reference to a larger context. What may appear to be
a choice made of a free will may turn out to have been made under
unseen duress or coercion. Ultimately, we can only attribute free will
after the fact and only after considering the context. But if I cannot
be certain whether another person has made their choice according to a
free will, without reference to a larger context, what makes me
certain that I understand the choices I am making as I am making them?
Don't most people look back on the choices they made and see them as
part of larger events which were rarely clearly understood at the
time? When we were teenagers, the decisions we made seemed to be such
a struggle for authenticity and yet when I look back, I just think I
was a typical teenager. I never thought of myself as acting like a
teenager while I was acting like one. It seems, then, that we only
understand ourselves and others, after the fact. But then doesn't this
lead to the possibility that I am not the best judge of who I am?
Maybe, if I want to truly understand myself, I should not sit down in
front of a fireplace and meditate on the question, 'Who am I?', but
rather go around and ask the people with whom I interact.
Which leads me back to Mike's original comments. What interests me is
not whether Mike is right about associating me with Kierkegaard, or
Walter with Plato, but the fact that Mike made those connections. Now
we may disagree, but what would be the nature of that disagreement?
Sincerely,
Phil Enns
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
