In class we are considering whether we should bother studying philosophy. This week in particular we are in the midst of discussing the merits of the following argument:
1. Studying philosophy is useless for addressing material needs.
2. If studying philosophy is useless for addressing material needs, then there's no need to study philosophy.
3. Therefore, there's no need to study philosophy.
To help you further evaluate the argument, here's what I want you to do.
 |
| Martha Nussbaum |
"Why study Humanities subjects? Isn't studying Philosophy, for example, just a luxury of no obvious value to a democracy? Martha Nussbaum thinks not. In her recent book, Not For Profit
, she has made a passionate defence of the Humanities. In this episode of the Philosophy Bites podcast she discusses these issues with Nigel Warburton."(After clicking on the link, click on "Listen to Martha...." just above the pictures of the books.)
http://philosophybites.com/2010/12/martha-nussbaum-on-the-value-of-the-humanities.html
 |
| Yes, this happened. |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7EU0-mjw5M
There is plenty here in both clips to provoke discussion. What, in your view, were some of the main claims regarding the nature and role of philosophy in a democracy? What is it that philosophy in particular contributes to democracy? What, if any, are the implications of their views for your own practices and pursuits? Do Nussbaum and West have anything in particular to say to the Church? Might their views have any implications for Cedarville?
Please engage with one another. Take advantage of this opportunity to think together in community. Don't be satisfied with superficial responses to difficult matters. Don't be content with superficial thinking here. Challenge yourself and others. Press hard. And, as always, be gracious and charitable.
61 comments:
Both Martha Nussbaum and Cornel West talk about how philosophy does hold a very important role when it comes to democracy. Nussbaum speaks specifically about arguments that politicians bring to the table and that the people should be able to dissect them. Most of the time the arguments are not good yet they present them in a way where many people fall for them. Instead she believes that if more people engage in philosophy more people would be able to catch on to the bad arguments. She also says that we need to be able to ask and answer tough questions such as “what is justice?” She says we need to treat human beings as an end rather than a means. Basically she wants people to be able to argue with each other and discuss different arguments or views in an intellectual way.
Cornel West obviously is very adamant about the value of philosophy. He thinks that without exercising our minds we are not living. He says without asking hard questions about the world which we live then we are dead. He said even among the busy streets of the city people are not living. I think an interesting point he made was that often many Americans believe that they have everything and are the best in everything. He said that we have to let go of these misconceptions. We need to ask the tough questions about what is actually wrong with the country and what needs to be changed. We cannot live in a bubble where our nation is the greatest. Philosophy is meant to help us think through different ideas and answer the tough questions about how things really are.
They both make it clear they believe that philosophy is important to our everyday lives. Those tough questions that we should ask will influence our lives and the way that we live. People who do not engage their mind in intellectual activity will never grow, learn, or influence the lives of others.
(11:00AM)
Martha Nussbaum discussed how important critical thinking is, how world history and our understanding of other cultures, and how imagination is important so that we can understand things outside of ourselves. Each of these ideas interlock with each other, so that one must use imagination when understanding world history, etc. She agreed that if more people pursued philosophy, then they would know how to think in a stronger manner and to learn how to appropriately question others' beliefs.
Cornel West argues that philosophy is a central part of our lives. It is critical to wrestle with different ideas within our lifetimes. He says that a philosopher is strictly a lover of wisdom, and it only takes courage for one to think critically. An interesting point he had was that learning how to die is a central point within philosophy; one cannot pursue truth without learning how to die. Another interesting point that he had was that pleasure has it's place within our lives; music, TV, poetry, etc. all have places within our lives. Pleasure can be found within the life of the mind and can reenergize our lives, but it can also be such a strong force that we desire to do nothing else but where we are finding that pleasure.
In summary, both found philosophy to have important places within our minds and lives and somehow, our lives would be much less satisfied without the seeking of knowledge and intellect.
Martha Nussbaum stresses that in order to really understand history, we must put ourselves in the shoes of those before us and use our imagination. This requires a deeper thought process and wider spread of understanding. Philosophy is critical for international affairs as well, because if our material needs are better met through international affairs, then we are responsible for pursuing and acknowledging the value of philosophy, but studying it. I found her take on democracy interesting in that we as the United States are to work together to better find how philosophy contributes to our decision and to also use it to our advantage.
Cornel West is an obvious and passionate philosophy supporter. He argues that we can use our minds for enjoyment when we pursue philosophy and it will fuel our lives for more than what it can without using philosophy. Americans cannot remain naive, thinking we have the best and are the best. West states that we need to ask the deeper questions and go back to the roots of what we were founded on and how philosophy is of crucial importance to our furthering in success.
Ashtyn B.
Martha Nussbaum did a wonderful job of stressing the importance of the humanities and the different areas that they influence. As a history major I am a little biased, but I loved her comments on the value of world history and the importance of being able to understand our world. She stressed the idea of imagination and the place it must play in our broader knowledge of the world.I absolutely love how philosophy and the humanities tie into history. Taking Western Civ and Humanities last semester made me fall in love with these ideas.
Cornel West I was less enthusiastic about. He seemed a little bit all over the place. It was intensely clear that he loved philosophy and thought it played a very important part in our lives. Whereas Nussbaum presented an argument and then worked through it, I had a little bit more trouble connecting all of West's thoughts. He is clearly a passionate man who deeply believes in what he is talking about. His claims about philosophy were genuine and sincere.
Asking tough questions was a theme for both Nussbaum and West. I believe this is essential to living a well-informed, well-rounded life.
Nicole S. MWF 9am
After listening to Martha Nussbaum and Cornel West it is clear that there is a very real need for philosophy in democracy. Nussbaum makes the statement that democracy requires a certain kind of self examination and a certain kind of critical ability. Voters and politicians need to thoroughly analyze their own beliefs and determine why they vote and behave in the way they do. Nussbaum agrees with Socrates that we should not just refer to tradition or authority to make our decisions, and I have to agree as well.
There are many issues facing our culture today that we must think critically about if we wish to determine the proper course of action. Had our country always just relied upon tradition and history, it is possible that slavery might still be in existence today. Today we are facing issues as well, which although they may not seem as important as slavery, are important nonetheless. Issues such as gay marriage, gun rights, and immigration are all pressing issues to our nation. We must think critically about these issues and not merely believe something that we have been spoon fed by our parents or others.
Once we have determined our beliefs by practicing philosophy, voters need to learn the skills of argumentation. Philosophy helps democracy in that it enables politicians and citizens to clearly debate issues in order to arrive at the best solution. It teaches our citizens that the quick solution is not always the best, and that sometimes deep thought on an issue can create much better results. It is obvious that philosophy is important to democracy.
-Dave D. 1100
I got the impression that part of philosophy has to do with democracy and our governmental system. It was mentioned that we need to understand those around us and that that is a huge part of democracy. Martha Nussbaum mentioned that children even from young ages will wonder what others are thinking whether it is our parents or other people around us. Understanding what others are thinking and going through is huge to our pursuit of knowlege of philosophy. Philosophy will contribute a sense of unity and understanding among the people of a democracy. How are we supposed to better ourselves if we cannot work together to understand each other? By becoming non schooled philosophers, we have this opportunity to take our persepective and have it challenged out in the world and learn from that and come to a place where we can benefit those around us. I didn't hear anything specifically aimed at the church, but as a believer, I definitely heard the call to be more actively involved in the world as well as its people and events. Going back to the idea that we all can become philosophers even without schooling, we as Cedarville students should pursue philosophy in out careers and walks of faith.
~Denida Chapman 11am
Martha Nussbaum and Cornel West both stated some very important reasons for studying philosophy. Nussbaum suggested philosophy is useful for studying other cultures and religions. It helps us understand history and figure out how to do better in the future. West said that philosophy helps us somewhat determine the meaning of life as well as what truth really is.
Cornel West stated that philosophy is necessary to keep a democracy what it is intended to be. Philosophy dares to ask questions that shut down dogmatism. It helps keep those in authority accountable to those affected by it.
As an international studies major, I believe a big part of my career will involve philosophy. Diving into new cultures will challenge me to figure out why they believe certain things, why the people have different customs and traditions, and why the people live the way they choose to live.
I believe the Church should take Nussbaum's challenge seriously. She suggests using philosophy to study and understand people of other cultures and religions. Unfortunately I find this to be something the Church (myself included) has become very lazy in doing, if we do it at all. if we want to reach others for Christ I believe it is necessary to put effort into understanding what those people believe and why. This quest to understand could begin with the students right here at Cedarville.
Emily S.
MWF 9:00
Martha Nussbaum makes a reasonable argument of including philosophical study within school curriculum as a way to strengthen democracy, as a way to question what has always been accepted. She suggests that governments, business, industries aren't considering the long-term benefits that philosophy could yield, through thoughtful self-examination. If we would only learn to put ourselves in another person's shoes, to step outside your own world, to discover other cultures. Democracy needs a way to imagine a world that does not yet exist, that perhaps democracy has not been fully realized. By learning to examine our culture in a critical light we can begin to identify the material needs that exist all around us. We can be world changers, but we must understand the world we seek to change -- philosophy is the key!
West is also passionate about learning to be a critical thinker. He describes the philosophical mind as one of rebirth, being able to die in the mind to be reborn. There is a place for pleasure, there is a place for the arts, there is a place for literature. All of these subject matters attempt to stimulate the mind, to bring the mind to a higher level. West mentions the courage to examine the soul as being of greater importance than the courage of a soldier to enter a battle. We must learn to question ourselves, our beliefs, our needs.
Likewise, the Church and Cedarville can learn much from these two intellectuals. The Church should be constantly examining itself, constantly comparing its current state of affairs to the Bible. Cedarville too should be constantly stepping back from the way things have always been to examine whether its current operations line up with a biblical worldview. Can we be doing things better, approaching situations differently, allowing certain practices within? Are we becoming overly legalistic, overbearing in our traditions, inclusive in our relationships? The implications are far reaching and deserve thoughtful insight and critical scrutiny. The default mode is apathy. Shame on us if we fall into a rut and fail to reorient our minds on Christ!
What I got from this is that Nussbaum is for philosophy because it will enrich our society, it will give us a voice in which to ask the hard question.
Dr. Nussbaum believe that philosophy and the humanities are still needed in today world. Like so many other she believe that if we let our school do away with philosophy then we as a society will lose something that we will never get back, and that is reason, or thinking outside the box when it comes to politic and life itself. As for West he went on about many different things. Who ever was asking the question did not have then written down, and the interview was conducted in a cab and not in a hotel room or a lobby of a hotel. I was distracted from his response with the moving of the cab,and the sounds of the city. I tried to close my eyes just to lessen to what he was saying but couldn't keep them close. I was more interested in what was going on behind him on the street. If I had to choose one of them to take a class from it would be Nussbaum. She has a philosophers mind, and knows how to keep it simple. But if I wanted to go outside the box, and really think about other things like how philosophy enter into music and poetry then I would sign up for Dr.West class. I believe that his class would not be boring. The fact that school are moving away from philosophy shows us that critical thought is not really need in today society.I can only think that corporation just want a bunch of yes men and woman in their company. The upper level wants a dictatorship within their company. What we are getting in school at the collage level is what many big business whats in a stating level person. So one just has to look at what he or she is force to take in collage and you can see where big business is heading. Our society is starting to look like the movies from the 70"s where we are told what to think and what to do and where we are to work according to your level of free thought. If you have a lot of free thought then you are put in prison and only those who will follow the norm will get the best jobs and move up in the company. There maybe a time when people who call themselves philosophers will end up as Socrates dying from a cup of poison because the society has no love, and no tolerance for anyone who thinks outside of the box.God help us when we get to that point in this country.
Martha Nussbaum claims that philosophy serves to enrich society, culture, and democracy. She states that “Democracy requires a certain kind of self-examination, a certain kind of critical ability.” This statement leads into a discussion on how knowledge of world history, world religion, and imagination are all key components of what we need if we are going to better ourselves. It is important to understand the history behind our nations if we are going to move forward. It is important to understand different religions, otherwise we will become narrow-minded and will stereotype other unfamiliar religions, in ways that possibly are not even true. We need to be able to see the world through the eyes of others—to walk a mile in another person’s shoes. These are all necessary components of democracy. Democracy needs critical thinkers and informed people who are not content to sit by and not question anything.
Cornel West is obviously passionate about philosophy. He claims that philosophy can be used to enrich our lives, in fact, he takes it even further in claiming that doing philosophy, thinking, and cultivating your imagination—that in these moments, you are living. He claims that you are more alive when you are doing these activities than people bustling through a busy city. We need to exercise our minds, to think critically, and to ask tough questions.
Both of these view have several implications for the Church, Cedarville, and my own personal life. Ignorance will only serve as a hindrance when it comes to serving others, to reaching out to others. I agree with what Adam Olsen said: We can be world changers, but we must understand the world we seek to change—philosophy is key! If we, the Church, CU, and myself, wish to make a difference in the world, then we need to ask questions. We need to throw off our ignorance of the world, because if we never do, then we will never be able to fully reach the world.
-Sarah L. (9:00 AM)
Cornell West hit the nail on the head with his message as he demands that we not only understand philosophy, but the nature of truth and the implications that brings. Whether we are talking government, religion, or even in our own personal lives, we must have courage to face philosophy. We must be able to face the own darkness in the corners of our souls. We must not only face the darkness, but do so with love and hope for a better tomorrow from what Christ has to offer us. When we internalize this courage on an individual level, then I believe we will also have the courage to make ethical decisions as leaders of both the church and the state.
Nussbaum, however, approaches the situation very differently. Where philosophy general diverges from the net benefits calculus, she hopes to prove that humanities can be evaluated in this way. We should consider that humanities teaches us dialogue which is key to understanding reality and our experiences. This pursuit eventually makes us effective problem solvers in government and religion both. After all, how are we supposed to understand reality if we don't understand history, culture, and the extent of our own imagination?
Jordan Ryner (9:00)
Both Nussbaum and West believe that philosophy plays an important role in all aspects of our existence, democracy included. Martha Nussbaum believes that imagination, a sort of symptom of philosophy, is critical in the governance of our society. She believes it keeps people from a perpetual stagnation of ideas that are just based on the mold that they have always operated under or "common sense." Critically evaluating the way we govern ourselves is the only way that cycle can be broken. I agree completely with the arguments that Nussbaum brought to the table. Who is to say that the preconceived ways of doing things is correct? Checks should always be in place to prevent these impediments of growth.
Cornel West has similar views to Nussbaum. He also believes that philosophy is, and should be, at the heart of democracy. He states in the clip we were to watch that it provides a means to challenge the elites of our society whose domination of what we do limits their accountability. He also mentions that philosophy is meant to wrestle with dialogue in the face of dogmatism. This could be something that applies to the church, and to a certain extent our university as well. A church or university that is unwilling to critically engage their beliefs and the beliefs of others is susceptible to fall into the realm of sect, this could not be better highlighted by the Westboro Baptist Church. The university/church will never grow if they try to impede the pursuit of knowledge toward truly understanding what the status quo is.
-Nick D 9:00
Through considering what said by Nussbaum in regards to the benefits of philosophy in the realm of democracy and expanding this idea to West’s comments on the centrality of simply loving wisdom and exploring deep questions in people’s lives, the claim that those who do philosophy tend to be more able to engage in critical thinking is further supported. One of the main criticisms presented against the typical procedure of democracy is its participant’s inability to defer from tradition and authority. Too often individuals fail to stop and really consider what they believe to be true about an opinion and instead offer a suggestion based on what they have been told is true or whatever the current emotion-evoking movement may be. Doing philosophy in democracy equips individuals with various attributes that foster the ability to think analytically on a topic at hand such as skills of argumentation, knowledge of world history, the ability to avoid narrow stereotyping, an imagination, and an open mind. Aside from this, philosophy also trains its participants in the ways of engaging in respectful discourse. I cannot count the number of times I have become frustrated with watching a political debate due to the fact that any possibly valuable information is lost in a barrage of childish finger-pointing and name-calling. Perhaps in the efforts to gain as much knowledge about political systems and foreign policy, the desire to harness the ability to effectively apply, utilize, and communicate this understanding has been lost.
Democracy may not be the only arena in which this pursuit has been forgotten. While in college, students tend to become heavily affected by the cost-benefit mindset and therefore worry so intently on earning good grades and learning the basic skills of their profession that time to study philosophy seems to be nonexistent and, frankly, not important to find. The Church is no more innocent, often being criticized for its close-mindedness and illogical nature. Perhaps individuals in both institutions would do well to take advice from these two scholars and begin to make time for what could be truly valuable. Like those in democracy, they too could begin to consider it possible that modifications to their current views and practices could be in order.
Kaitlynn H. 9 AM
As far as democracy is concerned, Nussbaum was fairly clear in expressing how philosophy contributes. Nussbaum’s main point concerning philosophy and democracy was that a Socratic mindset is necessary to question societal norms, and reason through beliefs. We have to view others arguments as worthy of considering, and not view those with different opinions as opponents (i.e. doing away with the “Republicans VS Democrats” mindset). Doing these things is essential to establishing a working democracy. West talked a bit about philosophy as directly related to government, in that thinking deeper prevents us from being ruled by oppressive dictators or ideologies. Really, he would advocate that we do philosophy in democracy because we must pursue truth. We need to pursue truth in doing democracy for obvious reasons, but that doesn’t mean that the answers are themselves obvious. How to have a democracy that functions best for the humans in it requires some serious philosophy, making judgment calls on the priorities of people’s needs and so on.
I think both would have some things to say to the Church. Both would advocate the pursuit of truth through critical thinking. They would warn against acceptance of long accepted ideas for no good reasons. They would encourage the study of others’ beliefs outside our own convictions for the sake of mind expansion. I’m sure they would call us to be more open-minded. In some ways, this is good, though I think that ultimately we must believe and hold to the fact that Christianity lays hold of the ultimate Truth, salvation through Jesus Christ alone.
I would say there are implications for our own lives here and our university. Nussbaum’s points on imagination and knowledge of other cultures are good advice. Certainly, a more comprehensive knowledge of human groups and practices other than our own and the capacity to stretch our mind as with an active imagination are good things, and can enhance our abilities to understand new ideas. Doing this on the scale of a University would be very beneficial for thought and idea formation. West’s ideas also have bearing on our own lives. His assertion about our own finitude and fallibility is important to remember always; when we lose sight of that we are destined to be deceived in some way or another. Also, his belief about “time as a gift” is interesting to consider personally. Essentially, looking through the lens of this view, West views things in a more positive light, like seeing “failures” as learning experiences and looking back on history to see what we have done. This is certainly an interesting concept, something I would like to put into practice in my own ways of thinking. I think for me to personally view time as a gift the way West does could be very beneficial.
It is clear that Nussbaum and West both value philosophy and advocate for people to think critically about the world and systems around them. After listening to both of these clips, I can see the benefits of philosophy in helping us critically think, analyze, and argue properly. I would agree with Nussbaum in the long term benefits of this. However, is there really something seriously wrong in not learning and cultivating these qualities? Do we hurt ourselves and others when we go along with tradition and the crowd? What if we are actually following many of the right assumptions, ideas, or traditions? And are we really dead and not living just because we don't have a deep knowledge of world history and other religions and choose to not stew over tough questions about the world?
When West stated that it takes courage to think critically and questions ourselves, does this mean that we are greater cowards if we choose to not think as critically as another individual?
I am not listing these questions because they are my views but I do wonder about some of these questions.
In everything, I do see how these questions can refuted or argued against. I think both West and Nussbaum had good things to say about philosophy and its value in our lives. Because we are a democracy, it seems like we have a responsibility to be educated about the world around us and especially our nation. I believe we see frustration, especially in political matters, between people who think critically about decisions and others who easy go along with tradition.
Isaac M. 11am
What I found particularly interesting in especially the Nussbaum interview is the role of philosophy in democracy and the need for imagination to do so. Imagination is the doorway by which philosophy can enter in to so many facets of culture. West talks about a need for understanding that one has to put aside dogmatism and die to that way of thinking in order to engage the cultures around us. I think they both make good points. I still struggle with the notion that dogmatism of every sort must be put away to do philosophy. Don't people need something to which they hold from which they reason? Is philosophy in itself looking for dogmatism in reason, an understanding that is worth holding on to tightly or is it just making sense of what we should hold on to loosely.
- Tim Hull (9:00)
The concept of cost-benefit analysis is something that has changed the face of education and the humanities, particularly philosophy. But with the world being a global trade industry, and technology diminishing barriers from culture to culture, how are we to put ourselves in other's shoes or relate to others from their point of view without the humanities? (Asks Nussbaum) Furthermore, Nussbaum says that within our own country we need the humanities so that we can inner relate in order for a democracy to function. There is constantly propaganda thrown our way and marketing that we need to be able to muddy through, to keep our morals and ideals in tact. Moving toward religion, Nussbaum states that we need to teach children from a very young age the difference in comparative religions around the world. While we are taught certain fundamentals in the US about love and families for example, we can rarely see what this means without looking to outside sources and viewing their interpretations of things like these.
Cornel West begins with a very direct reason for philosophy,wrestling for answers to desire, dialog in face or dogmatism, and wrestling with democracy... "all concentrated forms of power that are not held accountable by the people who are effected by it." West discusses this and relates church to surrendering our biases and preconceived truths and making certain what we have been taught is not something comparable to both of these philosopher's interpretations of democracy.
To me, philosophy is present in government to question laws in place, and provide reasoning to why those laws are their. In democracy, it is there to ask why people believe the way they do. Mrs. Nussbaum makes a good point when she states that we, as a nation, need to look past ourselves and see how our actions are effecting others. Mr. West states that we should question ourselves. By doing this, we should be more aware on what our actions do to others. The Church could take a note here. The actions of church infighting has lead people from the outside to believe we are just bickering people who are divided and cannot make up our minds. Should we not beware of our actions? Our conduct reflects directly on the church, and in turn, on Christ. If the church had stopped and looked on the effect of their infighting several years down the road, I believe they would have stopped short on a great many things and reconsidered their course of action. Unfortunately, shortsightedness in never in short supply.
Nussbaum and West both show the importance of engaging in philosophy when it comes to government. It is needed for critical thinking, to find our place in this world and to see situations from outside our perspective. I really liked what she said about education focusing short term profit. I got through high school by cramming for tests the night before and can barely remember the classes I took let alone what I learned. Even from that simple perspective I was focused on the short term affects and not the long term ones. On a larger scale education focuses on short term materialistic goals, like getting a good education to get a high paying job to make a lot of money. While yes, financial stability is important, education and learning should be more about making money. Education should develop critical thinking, different perspectives, and most important it should engage and challenge our minds. By just focusing on the material needs of ourselves, we fail to meet the material needs of other, and the emotional, and spiritual needs of others as well. West mentions that in order to know Truth there has to be a transformation, in which one must die. (This reminds me of Jesus’ teaching when he says you must die to your old self and become a new creature) On a non-religious level perhaps this truth and dieing could be found by using ones imagination as Nussbaum suggest. Without imagination you can’t out yourself in other people’s perspective, which is a necessary aspect to living in peace and understanding with those around you.
Jessie Comeau 9:00 MWF
Nussbaum and West both show the importance of engaging in philosophy when it comes to government. It is needed for critical thinking, to find our place in this world and to see situations from outside our perspective. I really liked what she said about education focusing short term profit. I got through high school by cramming for tests the night before and can barely remember the classes I took let alone what I learned. Even from that simple perspective I was focused on the short term affects and not the long term ones. On a larger scale education focuses on short term materialistic goals, like getting a good education to get a high paying job to make a lot of money. While yes, financial stability is important, education and learning should be more about making money. Education should develop critical thinking, different perspectives, and most important it should engage and challenge our minds. By just focusing on the material needs of ourselves, we fail to meet the material needs of other, and the emotional, and spiritual needs of others as well. West mentions that in order to know Truth there has to be a transformation, in which one must die. (This reminds me of Jesus’ teaching when he says you must die to your old self and become a new creature) On a non-religious level perhaps this truth and dieing could be found by using ones imagination as Nussbaum suggest. Without imagination you can’t out yourself in other people’s perspective, which is a necessary aspect to living in peace and understanding with those around you.
Jessie Comeau 9:00 MWF
In his taxi cab style interview, Cornell West provided an interesting view on the role of philosophy within everyday life and its role in our Western democracy. I feel his description of philosophy within democracy was essential and quite relevant to today. It's important to continually evaluate the issues and to make decisions based on what is happening and what you value in life. Recognizing the fullness of what is going on seemed to be a fairly central issues in the interviews. This comes into importance within the context of ensuring that you stay informed. In our fast moving society, it is a quality trait to be able to grasp the issues at hand and base decisions accordingly. This facet has powerful implications in all aspects of society, whether at Cedarville, your church, or even at home.
-Austin K. (11:00)
Self-examination was prevalent in both Nussbaum and West’s clips. That is probably what I took notice of, and viewed most of their monologue in light of that. When Nussbaum spoke of obtaining knowledge of world history, not just for memorizing facts, but to be reflective of the past…that is introspective. How does the past impact me, not just for my benefit, but for what I can do in service to others. In reference to world religions, how well do I know other major religions other than what I have skimmed over or heard in the news. There is more to their world then what I can see from mine. Pull that together with her point of discussing differing point respectfully with one another. Not to win the argument, but to gain a better understanding. I appreciated that.
West spoke several times about interrogating self…take time to slow down and take a hard look at yourself. He quoted it was more difficult to look in to one’s self then for a soldier to go to war…though he has probably not gone to war. Both would have you return changed, one possibly death (I guess that is changed as well). I would think that sitting in the trenches (or bunker, or tent, or behind sand bags) gives a person plenty of time to think deeply about who they are. I also suppose that digging deeply into your own thoughts and motives, while sitting at home, could feel as if you are at war with yourself. Not sure which is easier, I guess it depends on what you feel your calling is.
Denise (11)
Nussbaum feels that we do not value philosophy in our world. It constantly gets removed from programs because of faulty cost balance analysis. Philosophy causes us to be able to imagine what others worlds are and cause us to walk in their shoes metaphorically. Without philosophy history is just dry facts, not learning from real people’s lives. Philosophy is asking difficult questions. The life must continually be examined because otherwise we have a very narrow view of the world.
According to Cornel West philosophy is about: our finite situation, it is working to influence the powers that are not accountable to those who are affected by their decisions, and most importantly philosophy is a love of wisdom. We must surrender our pride because we are fallible. West believes that pleasure is necessary in all its forms. You are more alive when you are alone but reading the conversations written then when in a crowd ignoring the conversations of the past. We have to develop a stick-to-it-ness in the face of catastrophe. American needs to not see itself as a city on a hill but a democratic experiment that we need to critically evaluate and work to make America its best possible given the circumstances it is in.
I like what Nussbaum said about families and how she noticed the differences amongst cultures. I think it's important to understand culture when understanding democracy because culture determines democracy. So philosophy is important to study in relation to democracy because you could ask yourself if democracy is really the best way of governance for all cultures or any culture.
West talks about wrestling with death and desire. I think all humanity wrestles with these things and philosophy is just one way of wrestling with the truth of them. The Church West says is just one way of doing that. Here at Cedarville, we of course are wrestling with these things but for us we have the Bible to provide some answers and we channel our desire toward God, or at least that is what we hope for.
One of my peers pointed out that it is obvious that philosophy helps politicians in their political debates. I would like to add it is also obvious when politicians do not study philosophy or have a dogmatic approach to philosophy.
like what Nussbaum said about families and how she noticed the differences amongst cultures. I think it's important to understand culture when understanding democracy because culture determines democracy. So philosophy is important to study in relation to democracy because you could ask yourself if democracy is really the best way of governance for all cultures or any culture.
West talks about wrestling with death and desire. I think all humanity wrestles with these things and philosophy is just one way of wrestling with the truth of them. The Church West says is just one way of doing that. Here at Cedarville, we of course are wrestling with these things but for us we have the Bible to provide some answers and we channel our desire toward God, or at least that is what we hope for.
One of my peers pointed out that it is obvious that philosophy helps politicians in their political debates. I would like to add it is also obvious when politicians do not study philosophy or have a dogmatic approach to philosophy.
-Alyssa C (9.00)
West makes it clear early on in his interview that there must be death to find truth. Not as an event but dying in life. This runs parallel to the thoughts of Paul in the Bible. So what? I believe that Cedarville needs to start seeking out this truth and dying daily. Yes we are commanded to do it but do we actually do it? Do we die daily to carry our cross and live for Truth (Christ)? Do we see it out? Do we allow suffering to speak? As far as I know it seems we allow suffering to be bottled up and not shown, so are we seeing truth if we don’t allow our sufferings out? If we live in the bubble of Cedarville and don’t go explore and see the world, it would seem like we would be running from the truth. Believe it or not, the world has its own definition for truth and the certainly don’t like our definition for Truth. Truth is Christ. What are the aspects of Christ that we don’t show that they can’t see? If we don’t go out into the world and show truth, then how will people find the real Truth. But in the end we are fallible we as Christians and the word, we are human and prone to error but should that hold us back from pursuing truth? I think not. This is why philosophy is important and not just a stupid thought in the mind of a Christian, we are fallible, if we weren’t; Christ wouldn’t have had to come. So what is your truth? Is it concrete or are you working out your salvation and picking up the cross daily?
Anna P. (11:00)
Nussbaum and West certainly made some convincing arguments for the study of Philosophy. I particularly found the argument by Nussbaum involving the imagination to be particularly insightful. The imagination is often thought of as a childlike attribute, losing its zeal as the thinker leaves adolescence. However, I think the imagination plays a vital role in society, and if its importance could be reinstated through the medium of philosophy, it would be beneficial to our society as a whole.
Imagination leads to creativity, and creativity leads to new things, never been though of before. Our society needs innovation, especially innovation through the spread of the Gospel. Philosophy stems from the imagination and it certainly grows it. This, in itself, proves to me why philosophy is a worthwhile endeavor.
-Laramie Huggins (11:00)
Martha had some brilliant insight into our cultural priorities. I would agree that a reason the humanities are on the decline is due to the global economic state. The general life seems to be get established and make money as fast as possible. This is a ignorant view on how life should be. The very questions and concerns we have today in life are a direct result of the lack of contemplation in our society. Our issues won’t go away by attempting to fly by them and establish ourselves before they take a large effect on us. We should recognize the situation we are in and understand that the humanities and study of philosophy are an important catalyst in “figuring out” our predicaments.
I agree with west in his statement of an examined life. We are lacking courage in our culture to stand up and view our world for what it is. I think we are too specifically trying to make small changes and avoiding the larger ones. It’s not working. There is something drastically wrong with our thinking in today’s culture. We put too much thought into the procedure rather than the output.
Wests approach to the humanities was much more broad than Martha. She had a clear view with specifics of how the humanities and philosophy are important. West approached it more from a why and what perspective. They are both valid arguments as to why philosophy is needed and the exact kind of responses we need as a culture, as a society to counter the anti-philosophy agenda.
Josh Helminiak
I would agree with Austin K. that the taxi cab style interview added a very insightful commentary to what West was saying. New York is known as a major center in the East for the US. It is a center of wealth and authority. New Yorkers are notorious for being too busy to live life. West would refer to the people passing by on the street say that few of them would examine their lives and struggle with or evaluate their beliefs. It just really reminded me of all time times that I put off critically thinking about issues or times when I blindly follow the opinions of people I trust. I think that out of all things, your personal or core beliefs are most important to critically evaluate because they are the foundations to all of your other beliefs and so also the foundations to all of your actions.
In response to Denise’s question, I think that West is correct in saying that it is easier to go to war than to be critical of your own beliefs. I have not been to war myself, but I think that war would be the easier choice because you rely on brute physical strength and you can be motivated by peer pressure. You can also get the energy required to fight from strong emotion and hormones. War mostly deals with the physical part of a person. Examining your beliefs on the other hand deals with the intellectual and spiritual part of a person. I think this is the most real part of you. This is where you cannot lie or give lame excuses. It is hard enough to admit that you are wrong to others, but I think that it is doubly hard to admit that you were wrong to yourself. Once you admit that you were wrong to yourself, you will no longer be content with your ignorance, but will be nagged to find out more and to modify your beliefs.
-Annelise
I would agree with Austin K. that the taxi cab style interview added a very insightful commentary to what West was saying. New York is known as a major center in the East for the US. It is a center of wealth and authority. New Yorkers are notorious for being too busy to live life. West would refer to the people passing by on the street say that few of them would examine their lives and struggle with or evaluate their beliefs. It just really reminded me of all time times that I put off critically thinking about issues or times when I blindly follow the opinions of people I trust. I think that out of all things, your personal or core beliefs are most important to critically evaluate because they are the foundations to all of your other beliefs and so also the foundations to all of your actions.
In response to Denise’s question, I think that West is correct in saying that it is easier to go to war than to be critical of your own beliefs. I have not been to war myself, but I think that war would be the easier choice because you rely on brute physical strength and you can be motivated by peer pressure. You can also get the energy required to fight from strong emotion and hormones. War mostly deals with the physical part of a person. Examining your beliefs on the other hand deals with the intellectual and spiritual part of a person. I think this is the most real part of you. This is where you cannot lie or give lame excuses. It is hard enough to admit that you are wrong to others, but I think that it is doubly hard to admit that you were wrong to yourself. Once you admit that you were wrong to yourself, you will no longer be content with your ignorance, but will be nagged to find out more and to modify your beliefs.
-Annelise
When we do philosophy we should be arguing with each other civilly. Many times people take much offense from what someone else says. We need to understand that everyone has different views, but we need to be able to discuss and know where the person comes from. Understand their stand before you judge the person. We don't like the fact that people judge us or come to quick conclusions, so why do we do that to others?
Kayleigh Wideman (9am)
First of all, I greatly enjoyed both Nussabaum and West's opinion on the matter of philosophy, truth, and democracy. The main argument that I understood from Nussabaum is the importance and significance of philosophy and humanities in democracy. She mentions the findings of past scholars and the value that they found in living an analyzed life. One applicable way she reasoned this is the value of analyzed decision making in democracy. Decision making should be rooted in analyzing history and a life of examination.
West took a different reasoning for the value of studying philosophy. He explained that studying of philosophy is studying towards death. It takes courage and discipline to study philosophy. He also explains that any one can be a philosopher because philosophy is a love of wisdom.
The implications that these two discussions have on the church and even on Cedarville are to be critical thinkers. Philosophy, the way both described it, imply that a lifestyle of philosophy is to ask the question, "why do I believe this?". Humanities and philosophy are good influencers on living a life of analyzation and pursuit of truth.
Nussbaum was talking about how philosophy helps us relate in many different ways such as in government or intercultural relations. Also she touched on how knowing philosophy is helpful in rooting out bad arguments. I think she had very good points and i couldn't really find any holes in her statements partly because she used boring and confusing language. West on the other hand made a lot of sense and I really liked his bit about true philosophy can only take place if we have a death so to speak. One thing i have a problem with is how he relates dogmatism with idolatry. I do not think this is accurate. Idolatry is worshiping something other than God and dogmatism could be holding on to God and refusing evidence against Him. If the average person took up philosophy then they would also be able to hold the government more accountable because they would be better equipped to question their actions. (side note, if West is a lover of wisdom then he would not have used the Lords name in vain and he does therefore he is a failed philosopher to his own definition). Over all i feel like the points that they brought up made a lot of sense and i find it hard to argue with them.
Kyle Classen (9:00)
I think just about everything I had planned to say has been at least touched on, but I think Isaac M. brought up a good point. "Do we hurt ourselves and others when we go along with tradition and the crowd?" "...does this mean that we are greater cowards if we choose to not think as critically as another individual?" I've been wondering these sorts of things myself. Obviously there is no doubt benefit to searching for answers and thinking about hard questions, but is there much or any harm in not participating? I know that even by asking that question we are participating in philosophy, but that point aside, are there benefits to living with the way things are, and not questioning things?
It is often said, "ignorance is bliss," and I've gotten so frustrated at times looking for answers that I couldn't seem to find, I wanted to give up. However, when we choose to not think critically and go along with the crowd, we let others think for us. In a perfect world, this might not be so bad, but as is human nature, those doing the thinking are very likely to take to exploiting those who don't question it. Essentially if you don't think critically and question things, you can and will be taken advantage of. Naturally, we don't want this to happen.
Then again, does it really harm us too much? Is it worth the trouble? Won't we be taken advantage of anyway?
But as Isaac said, this doesn't necessarily reflect my view, but rather just some questions that came to mind.
Nussbaum explains the relationship between democracy and the humanities. Nussbaum explains that many people don’t learn history and about other cultures unless it relates to them. And because of this, we don’t have a deeper understanding about humanity in general. We become so focused on ourselves that we remain where we are, not thinking critically or evening questioning their own beliefs. And in a way, they lose their imaginations in the process. While on the other hand, Socrates began the Academy for the benefit of their democratic society by causing the youth the question and think.
West argues in a similar way that philosophy is a centerpiece of our lives. But one interesting point he makes is that dying or losing ourselves is a central part of philosophy. So to think critically, we must be able to “let go” of our own beliefs for the sake of the search for truth. He also argues that this process does not have to be a mundane or boring process, but as most things in life bring us pleasure, this pursuit can and should also.
Both philosophers emphasize how philosophy has its place in our lives, and engaging in philosophy helps us think critically as well as encourages others to do the same.
- Aaron
Nussbaum explains the relationship between democracy and the humanities. Nussbaum explains that many people don’t learn history and about other cultures unless it relates to them. And because of this, we don’t have a deeper understanding about humanity in general. We become so focused on ourselves that we remain where we are, not thinking critically or evening questioning their own beliefs. And in a way, they lose their imaginations in the process. While on the other hand, Socrates began the Academy for the benefit of their democratic society by causing the youth the question and think.
West argues in a similar way that philosophy is a centerpiece of our lives. But one interesting point he makes is that dying or losing ourselves is a central part of philosophy. So to think critically, we must be able to “let go” of our own beliefs for the sake of the search for truth. He also argues that this process does not have to be a mundane or boring process, but as most things in life bring us pleasure, this pursuit can and should also.
Both philosophers emphasize how philosophy has its place in our lives, and engaging in philosophy helps us think critically as well as encourages others to do the same.
- Aaron R. 11:00
In response to Kyle C.
"Idolatry is worshiping something other than God and dogmatism could be holding on to God and refusing evidence against Him."
Dogmatism is refusing to alter one's beliefs regardless of the merit of the argument presented against them. To think Christianly, and responsibly, one must not adopt this stance. Dogmatism at its core demonstrates a lack of faith. The Christian who dogmatically holds to their beliefs and is unwilling to engage in rational argument cannot both assert the truth of his own beliefs and continue to practice dogmatism. The Christian belief in God as a source for absolute truth necessarily follows that no matter what the content of the argument, there is only one true answer to it, and that is rooted and established in God. Thus to hold a dogmatic point of view, and so refuse to engage in argument, betrays the dogmatists faith, proving that he does not in practice believe in an absolute truth in God.
-Andrew K (11:00)
Martha Nussbaum makes many points on the subject of philosophy. Some of her key views include philosophy as the gateway to thinking about justice and morals in the correct mindset. When it comes to evaluating democracy philosophy invites us to question what should and should not be. When a subject comes up philosophy is there to help us evaluate all of the arguments and ask the right questions evaluating these arguments and the original subject. Martha Nussbaum encourages us to be skeptical when it comes to acceptance of arguments—that we should question every established apparent truth that we may actually find truth through this pilgrimage. She expands much beyond democracy and claims that philosophy helps gain cultural knowledge that helps us understand the world—possibly through the eyes of another culture it could be seen differently and hopefully more clear. Martha also says that we gain increased vision through the study of comparative religion—that by realizing the different motivations and drives of others that we might avoid stereotypes and gain a more real view of the world. Cornel West makes many points about how philosophy allows us to not necessarily find all of the answers but ask the right questions. He claims that philosophy allows us to wrestle with dogmatism, white supremacy, and all concentrated forms of power that are not accountable. He also goes on to say that philosophy helps us to find and understand truth. He seems to express that philosophy exposes much of the world as gray. For example, when asked if philosophy could answer what a meaningful life is he elaborated, after saying philosophy does address the subject, that meaning could be debated on and if it is understood a great achievement has been made.
Looking at what Nussbaum and West say in respect to religion and how we carry it out, I think some very good points were made. Given that I am a Bible major, I am most interested in converting what I learn in all my classes into ways where I can improve spiritually. This is why I chose to just focus on the aspect of the prompt. Plus, they said too many awesome things, so I do have to be selective or this will be dreadfully long.
Nussbaum speaks about comparative religion. She says that we have too limited a view of other people's beliefs, leading to harsh stereotyping. On a similar note, she also encourages people to become familiar with one other culture in the world. I think this understanding of culture and religion can go a long way to helping the typical Cedarville student improve spiritually. Obviously, understanding of a different culture/religion will help rhetorically when attempting to propagate Christianity within that people group. However, being aware of different modes of thought can also help you be better at thinking about Christianity and what it says/means. I think that this is where the imagination comes in, finding a way to bridge the beliefs we hold as true with the ways of thinking of another culture/religion. Successfully completing that intellectual bridge will expand your faith, not diminish it, and even allow it to be more effective. Again, I point to Paul. I am so glad he is in the Bible.
I found a lot of things that West said to be awesome, mostly pithy little statements that I jotted down. In regards to religion, a few things he said about truth come to mind. Mystery is hand in hand with truth. Truth is hand in hand with the way to truth. I really like those thoughts. They really help me be more at peace with the fact that I do not and cannot understand everything. I think they mesh really well with the Biblical presentation of a transcendent God. I think the best think of what he said was that the search for truth, often represented by religion or science, is a way of acknowledging how finite and fallible we are.
How does this apply to the Cedarville student? Nussbaum would say to break out of the bubble, and West would say to shun dogmatic traditions in favor of a more proper perspective, acknowledgement of individual fallibility as a first step toward divine truth.
Again forgot the tag: Micah W. 11 AM
These people blow my mind. Honestly, the way they think demands respect. Who cares if they don't necessarily know Christ, I am not sure whether or not Martha is a Christian. When people engage God's world, it's impressive. When you desperately search for truth, it's commendable. I really enjoyed both of these Philosophers. I had trouble following Martha, but I was on board completely with Cornel West. Philosophy is essential to the intelligence. You can be forced to accept things for what they seem to be or what has been fed to you your whole life, or you can struggle with it on your own. The Church needs to be like this too. If not, we are just ignorant. If we accept everything that everyone says, we are fickle changing with the wind. Nobody wants to be friends with someone who constantly changes. Or take the opposite stance, as a dogmatist you hold on to your views so strongly that you push people away. Clearly both these views are terrible, and you can find both within the Church. Some people just listen to what preachers say, and they blindly accept it. Take the issue of Slavery back years ago. If you were in the south, your pastor could teach about white supremacy, and they just accepted it. People didn't think critically for a long time about that issue. Now we are dealing with a Social Justice movement. People are concerned with social justice while we take Jesus out of the picture. We just accept it. We are molded by the world around us, and we are okay with that. That is not Philosophy. That is a wasted life. I like how West said that Life is about learning to die, or something like that. Death is an absolute part of life, we can accept it. Or we can engage it. There are many things that these two have to say to Cedarville. To me, it's all about engaging rather than accepting everything as truth. We are searching for Truth, we need to be able to discern it, even within the walls of Cedarville. There can be "truths" even here.
-Matt Jackson
Both Nussbaum and West present us with the perspective that Philosophy *protects* us from the narrow minded/dogmatic world. I find most significant the arguments on democracy. It causes us to consider the great impact that philosophy does have on society in relation to the way it rules itself.
Our Universities should be expanding, not cutting, their philosophy programs!
Austin Becton (11:00)
I second Austin's opinion. I found it kind of ironic listening to Nussbaum talk about the importance of philosophy and the humanities, in a time when we as a University have decided to cancel our philosophy major. Do I think we as a University and Christians are guilty of the same predominate mindset that undervalues philosophy and culture? Yes. The strongest argument against my assumption that we as a University undervalue philosophy would be that the philosophy cut was actually a much needed budget cut. Therefore, if we want to be cost effect we should cut philosophy. The problem with this argument is that it places financial advantage over the values of philosophy. As West and Nussbaum, suggested philosophy is a much needed discipline for it effects every area of our life (especially our faith). And yes, it is even worth our money. It's a good thing West said that you don't have to have a formal education to do philosophy because none of us are going to get one now! I would have to condition his statement that yes, anyone could do philosophy even without an education, but do they do it well? That is the question, can we do philosophy well.
-Taylor C. (9:00)
Nussbaum is a strong proponent of the Socratic Method, which she says has a fundamental impact on society. Because philosophy fosters an appreciation and increased skill in critical thinking, as well as advanced understanding of history, Nussbaum believes that philosophy is indeed essential for the benefit of all society. The “self-examination” she pushes for is meant to stop people from merely deferring to tradition and to stop people everywhere form living “an unexamined life. She claims that philosophy is essential for establishing our worldview, especially the way in which we interact with those who are different from us. This has an obvious and dramatic impact on democracy. A government built on the will of the people cannot escape the beliefs and philosophies of those people. And a nation that does not spend time developing its philosophies cannot stand long on any moral or ethical basis.
Cornel West also advocates for philosophy and the pursuit of what he calls being, “intentionally alive” West wants philosophy to be a part of every person’s life, for both their own personal benefit and the benefit of the community and world as a whole.
These views are essential for Christians especially to understand. We, most of all, should be intellectually engaged and ever in the creative process, looking for new ways to engage culture, understand the world as deeply as we can, and to reach the lost
- Patrick Flynn
After listening to both the podcast and the video interview, it became clear to me that both individuals (Martha Nussbaum and Cornel West) believed philosophy to be of great importance. Nussbaum brings up a very relative point in stating that we as a nation should be able to dissect many of the points and arguments that politicians make. This need is so real. I cannot begin to think of how often I see (on Facebook for example) a group of individuals blathering around in discussion about the rights and wrongs of fill in the blank politician. However, it has become apparent to me, that usually there is no significant evidence or understanding behind anything they say. Rather, people adorn their biased opinions and spit them out for the general public to hear. It is important to be able to think in a critical, philosophical manner in regards to the hot topics of our day. The only way that we can reasonably approach this topics is through the scope of philosophy. Cornel West makes an even more vivid attempt at proving philosophy's importance. He goes so far as to say that without philosophy, we are not really living. He makes a valid point in saying that we need to ask tough questions about where we stand as a nation. By doing this, we can critically engage ourselves in improving our nation as a whole. It is important, by both people's standards to engage in philosophy in order to intellectually inspire our mind. Engaging in philosophy is not simply asking random questions, and spending hours upon hours pondering their answers. Instead, philosophy is concerned with asking questions that are relevant and important to our culture and furthermore to our belief systems.
Johnna Vanstrom
The audio & video clips were very interesting to listen to. Martha Nussbaum's comments about humanities seem's very spot on. Taylor C. comment about Cedarville dropping philosophy as a major is a fine example of how relevent this subject is.
As a democratic country it is important to reflect on our history, present state and also the future. This involves self reflection and critical thinking. The U.S. has become a "sound bite" nation with no deep thoughts attached. This is damaging our future.
As for Cornel West, his views were a little scattered. I like how he said philosophy can be studied by the uneducated. Truly, it may be the start to an education. Not a formal one per say, but one with practical use and application. His point about how we are just learning how to die was very interesting. We all must come to grips with our mortality. We can not attain the the truth in this life. We must be willing to try, strive and even fail.
Philosophy in democracy are good bed fellows. As one grows in one area, the other prospers and as one declines so does the other.
Connie D. 9am M-W-F
One thing that I really enjoyed while listening to Martha Nassbaum was her discussion on imagination. I think that a lot of philosophy is using your imagination and trying to think of possibilities. In addition, since things in philosophy are not necessarily set in stone, imagination is needed in order to come to believe an idea or potential answer to something. I think this is an important thing to do that has not been brought up in class yet. Cornell West mentions how we are more alive when we are alone and able to really think then when we are in big crowds surrounded by people. I thought this was a neat point that I never really thought of before. I do my best thinking when I am alone. West's strong statements like this really show His passion for philosophy. When it comes to the Church, I think that we need to try to adopt some of West's passion and Nassbaum's idea of using our imaginations and keeping the study of philosophy alive as people are too often neglecting it. Philosophy is a critical branch of study that is needed to gain knowledge and it would be really unfortunate if it were to not be taught or done anymore to the extent needed. Nassbaum and West had a lot of neat information to say which I found to be extremely beneficial.
Kara B 9:00
The nature of philosophy in democracy is that is causes people to think and not just rely on tradition. It helps people to understand the other party’s views and not just attack them as ignorant or stupid. It helps people in a democracy to think of the long term impact of decisions made today not just the benefit for our generation or even our country for that matter. Philosophy allows you to look at the brokenness and accept it, not try and create some false image that cannot be obtained. It causes us to look at the truth without believing the disillusionments we have seen. Philosophy has many implications for my practices and pursuits. As I’ve said in group discussions, I’m a missions major. I plan on going and ministering to people in and from other cultures. I need to be able to not just look at them as being wrong because they are different from me and philosophy would be very useful for that. For the Church I believe the not just holding to traditions because that’s what we’ve always done would be a great asset to Her. We need to think about what we are doing. Are we really following God? That’s kind of an important question to know the answer to. For the church and for Cedarville, I think we need to be willing to address the brokenness and admit that it’s there. There is no use in hiding it. When we do we just create more broken people that are scared to talk because they do not feel equal to those that seem to be perfect because they let no flaws show.
-Hannah H. (9:00)
Partially in Response to Kara B.
I completely agree with your enthusiasm for Martha Nassbaum's discussion of imagination. It is so necessary that we have imagination enough to think outside of our own experience and perception. To put this into Cornel West's terminology, we must have courage to go beyond what we would expect, delving into the adventure of imagination. The absence imagination is (at least quite likely) the presence of dogmatism... because it requires imagination and courage to move beyond the comfortable concrete conclusions we tend towards. It is entirely necessary that we maintain an imagination that comes up with alternative possibilities and answers to questions we already think we have answered, because otherwise we will forever remain entangled in the mistakes of our teachers, parents, and influencers. Commitment to the Bible MAY be philosophically reconcilable, but we must defend ourself against commitment to human errors passed down for ages. The application of this concept certainly is not limited to this specific example.
Grant M. 11:00am
I enjoyed both clips and feel that one major theme expressed by both is that, in some capacity, democracy is failing. Nussbaum says that philosophy is failing because institutions are cutting back on humanities and philosophy programs. They use reason like cost-benefit analysis, but they fail to address the longterm costs of democracy without Philosophy. In order to work in a democracy, one must understand history, religion, and in some capacity be able to view the world through empathetic eyes. Without philosophy, propaganda holds sway and politics becomes a competition for points rather than a way in which to further the greater good of society.
For West, democracy fails because we as humans are too focused on success and devastated by failure. We are people or beings born with and for a death. Thus, the end will ultimately occur. Unfortunately, we are also born with desires that attempt to ignore death. As a result, our democracy is an experiment built on the deaths of indigenous people, slavery of blacks, and oppression of women. We are so focused one succeeded, we ignore moral and political good. Yet Truth, capital "T," allows for suffering to speak.
This idea of suffering speaking is the main point of both arguments; through empathetic hunting for truth, the individual can understand the world and history of the world in totality. We can use the understanding of history and the strives that we have made to further ourselves and humanity. We don't need to see or feel failure in what we don't accomplish, but relish in what we do accomplish. Then others can build on our successes and accomplishments, intellectual and otherwise. That is how humanity and democracy will survive: with philosophy.
Nussbaum said, “...you only do history well when you learn to do it critically...” and I think the same is true of philosophy. One can’t just take anything that other people tell me to be true. Because philosophy is critical thinking about our lives and worldview, it has everything to do with democracy. People can have their opinions about various topics and issues, but when they accept what others tell them without looking at it further, the spirit of democracy is in danger. If people in a democracy simply take what they hear from others and believe and support it, it’s more like they are being governed less by “the people” and more by the one putting ideas in people’s heads. I think this applies to philosophy, too. It seems that if philosophical ideas are told to someone who just accepts the ideas to be true, they never truly “did” philosophy. I think philosophy involves internal speculations. There’s no harm in hearing another’s viewpoint and thinking about it or discussing it, but to simply accept it without a thought isn’t wise. Nussbaum also talks about how it’s important to “cultivate our imagination so that we are not obtuse to other people.” She was talking about learning to be in someone else’s shoes. This could also be helpful when doing philosophy and trying to see other’s viewpoints.
Anna Z. MWF 9am
Nussbaum and West essentially claim that philosophy is part of the ideal thought life.
According to Nussbaum, if one wants to be imaginative, understanding, and knowledgeable about one's place in the world, then one must study subjects such as philosophy, world history, world religions, and literature. In regards to democracy, a system that holds the “elite” responsible to the “ordinary” people, philosophy is a subject that teaches people how to analyze, think critically, and argue ideas, laws, views, solutions, problems, etc. For a democracy that is supposedly run by “the people” it only seems reasonable that the people should be able to think well enough in order to govern their own affairs. In fact, some of the biggest arguments against democracy are that “the people” aren’t and even can’t be educated enough to rule themselves. Philosophy is a way to question social norms, break stereotypes, and respectfully dialogue with others about beliefs.
According to West, philosophy is crucial to the survival of the “fragile experiment” (democracy) when it is up against a stronger impulse in the human nature—domination.
Nussbaum and West’s views have particularly fortified my personal pursuit and practice of literature. It was literature that first opened my imagination, put me in places where I could begin to understand people from their perspective, and seriously questioned my own beliefs and presumptions. Literature is a unique medium to explore deep, dark corners of the human condition, whether the genre is fiction, poetry, or nonfiction. As a writer of fiction, it is not enough that I know everything good and everything bad about my characters, but I must understand the world from their eyes. I must love them. As a poet, it isn’t enough that I see the world in different ways (ostranenie; look it up) I should be able to evoke emotion and thought about life, death, things that matter. As a nonfiction writer, it isn’t enough that I report things that happened, but I interpret them and I reveal myself truthfully and render others around me truthfully. To present honestly as well as truthfully—that is the goal of the nonfiction writer. I find that philosophy then fits right in with any kind of writing.
Nussbaum and West don’t comment specifically about the Church. It is not brought up by them. One could take their views and apply them to the church, but that is not the question.
I think my peers have covered how Nussbaum and West’s views imply that Cedarville should be evaluating their traditions and rules and methods in light of reason and inquisitive thought, not just by saying “this is the way it’s been done and it works” or even using the excuse “this is what the Bible says”. It has been especially noted that as Christians we should be at the forefront of critical thought and engaging other views and cultures. I like what Tim Powers said about expanding our views of “human groups and practices other than our own”.
And because the first post was too long...this is a continuation!
I would like to echo Isaac M.’s question, “Do we hurt ourselves and others when we go along with tradition and the crowd? What if we are actually following many of the right assumptions, ideas, or traditions?”
I think what Isaac M. is getting at is that just because traditions exist, or long-held ideas exist, the fact that they are long-held and traditional (passed on from generation to generation) doesn’t make them inherently wrong. Yes we should assess them, yes we should analyze them as hard as anything else, but by assuming that traditions and long-held beliefs are wrong, then part of the philosophical process has been abandoned. The old being abandoned for the new, because the new is preferred. This is an attitude I find among many of my young, non-Christian friends. They defy tradition and other beliefs that have been around for a long time, and sure they ask good questions, but then they are not willing to engage the answers of such traditions/long-held beliefs. They eject the other side’s arguments, write them off as senile and not worthy of their time simply because they are old! This is not philosophy, and I think, especially in a culture where we grow up primarily among peers, people our own age, we tend to give more weight to what our peers say, or what our culture says, because much of our culture is all about new and rejects old.
It is vital that we take every argument under due consideration, the old along with the new.
Philosophy contributes a lot to democracy. Martha Nussbaum was talking about how democracy requires self-awareness, and argumentation skills. Philosophy helps develop those. Also, how we do politics stems from what we think about different things. Philosophy contributes to democracy because by doing philosophy, democracy can be improved. Nussbaum talked about how philosophy can help develop critical thinking, a sense of world history in understanding how we relate to other cultures, and imagination, or ability to look beyond our perspective. These three things all, indirectly or directly, impact democracy. Being able to think critically guides democracy by being able to know why we do things a certain way or why we would want to change how we do things as a country. Being able to understand how we relate to other cultures guides democracy because knowing how we interact with other cultures affects our nation’s international relations. Also, being able to look beyond our perspective affects democracy because it opens our minds to more, and maybe even better, possibilities that we did not think about in the first place.
There was one thing that Cornel West said that I think applies to each of us individually, as the Church, and as a Christian college. He said that is takes courage to think critically (i.e. doing philosophy). I never thought of it like that before. It does take courage to self-interrogate yourself and to take a hard look at your presuppositions about different aspects in life. It takes courage as an individual because what you have always known to be true may not appear to be true anymore. It takes courage as a Church because we will have to wrestle with questions and ideas that contradict what we have always been told are true and right. Furthermore, it takes courage at Cedarville University to think critically because thinking critically could cause some people to question your Christianity if you come up with a different conclusion then they did. When I look at doing philosophy as something courageous instead of dangerous, it motivates me to think critically. It no longer appears to have a strictly negative impact, but a positive one.
-Madison Pross (9:00)
Nussbaum’s main claim regarding the nature and role of philosophy in a democracy is that essentially a democracy needs philosophical study in order to survive. In the clip from her interview she said “democracy requires a certain amount of self-examination, a certain critical ability.” And that in Athens, the very first democracy Socrates dedicated himself to challenging the intellectual complacency that he saw around him with philosophical thought. Socrates believed it was necessary to “lead the examined life” in order to live well, which requires the study of philosophy. The benefits to this study that Nussbaum cites are the skills to participate in critical thinking, an understanding of world history and culture, and the ability to “cultivate our imaginations so we are not obtuse toward other people.” We must be able to assess history and culture, and get outside our own perspectives to try to understand other people. Secondly Nussbaum discussed the benefits of philosophy to democratic politics. In reference to propaganda and political arguments Nussbaum asserts that “Democracies cannot survive if propaganda is allowed to hold sway. Politicians are often bringing bad arguments one’s way and you need to be able to look at the argument.” Philosophy also aids political processes by creating an atmosphere for respectful examination of opposing sides. This is where the bit about having an imagination that keeps us from being obtuse toward other people comes in handy.
West had made similar claims about philosophy’s role in democracy. According to him philosophy keeps the “fragile experiment” of democracy alive. He also spoke about the necessity of thinking and seeking truth for the reason that we can be wrong about truth, because we will never know THE Truth, and we must be “open to revision.”
These principles also carry over into the Church, where many have been accused of being content to be spoon-fed and having no interest in engaging in critical thought for themselves. It is so important that people, especially Christians, be able to engage in the philosophical conversation and to think deeply about life and truth. As such, this message also applies to Cedarville. We should never tend more toward dogmatism than we do toward critical and intelligent thinking. Our students, who will be the next church leaders, teachers, politicians, lawyers, etc., need to be taught to think critically, and once taught, use those skills to better ourselves, our school, and our culture
Shelby F. 11:00
Nussbaum made some comments about the necessity for schools to teach history, art, religion, and other humanities as part of our understanding of culture and how it relates to developing governments and a democracy in particular. I don’t see a strong need to push for those any more than schools already do. Most instructional institutions are already schools of liberal arts. I would like to see more of an emphasis put on the philosophy of those studies in schools, though – Help students understand why they are learning those things and what the significance is—a lessons learned kind of thing.
West is very passionate about philosophy and it is encouraging to hear from someone so excited about the opportunity to just reason out the basis for why we do things the way we do. Finally coming alive to know and understand the complexities or awing in wonder of the universe truly is an escape of the daily life that leads us to the grave. West’s expressions of the essence of philosophy seem to greatly parallel that of coming to know Christ and the God of the universe.
It seems as though Cedarville could take a lesson from West and Nussbaum and incorporate philosophy in every study; particularly for general education requirements. Helping students understand why historical events happened the way they did and how a Christian uses philosophical arguments would be a great way for Cedarville to improve its regular curriculum.
The item that seems to baffle me is where democracy fits in. Obviously philosophy is the basis for policy making and the core of where government derives its power, but that is all governments. Democracy in itself is a fairly weak form of government and it can be easily flawed in its own founding principalities. Democracies, at their essence, are mob rule. Mob psychology is not a healthy self preserving ideology. For that very reason the founders of our great nation set up a republic. A government governed by written legislation. Certainly, as the founders declared, “it is the duty of the people to change or abolish it” should legislation be unfit or unbecoming of the nation, however, that legislation is law of the land and is purposefully very difficult to change. This is a buffer against tyrannical leaders and ill-willed politicians. Unfortunately, the large population seems to think we live in a democracy and the outcry of a people group, even a large one, is supposed to have an immediate effect on policy. Certainly one of the biggest atrocities of this action seriously being played out is the governmental control of the economy. People’s problems, particularly economic problems are temporary. There is no rational to instating long lasting changes to policy and conduct of citizens, particularly when times are good. The aberration of the country’s constitution is the very reason we need leaders of strong foundations in sound philosophy and ideally with the bible at the core of their beliefs.
Also, it should be stated that Cedarville is not a democracy and does not sway with the whim of the mass population, but is dictated by rules and bylaws.
-Ivan Priest
Nussbaum's point stressing the importance of critical thought within a democratic society is a good one. She mentions the way that politicians get into arguments where their purpose is entirely to defeat their opponents. They often bring bad arguments into their discussions and it is critical for a democracy to function properly that the public who votes on the politician is able to determine the errors in the politicians arguments and make a decision which is in the best interest if everyone in the society.
Andrew S. (11:00)
West defines philosophy fundamentally in part as a "critical disposition of wrestling with democracy in the face of structures of domination." He later affirms that one does not have to receive formal education to be a philosopher. Both of these points set philosophy apart as not only important to a democratic society but an inevitable part. One could even conclude from his position that democracy wouldn't exist if philosophy did not first attempt to wrestle with the authoritative figures in a society.
Going off of the Examined Life video and Cornel West's thoughts on philosophy I would have to agree with pretty much everything he said... that I could understand anyways. He spoke very intellectually, but he expressed a strong view towards the necessity of philosophy. Without philosophy we are not thinking at all and not living. He made a very interesting comment about Beethoven and the romanticism movement. Beethoven said on his death bed, "I've learned to look at the world and all it's darkness and still love it." That's not romantic, Beethoven gave up on it. Fell into the "blues." I think it is very interesting that he used music and the changing of emotions towards philosophy and how to think about and respond to the catastrophic and destructive time. Time is a gift according to West, and how we use that is something important.
Zack Gatlin (11:00)
Martha pointed out a lot of benefits for philosophy in democracy. That it is important to have the ability to see a person in their shoes (imagination) and to know history and appreciate art are all apart of philosophy and how partaking in these things help the processes of democracy. Cornel West also talks about philosophy in democracy, "attempts of people trying to render accountable the elites... to everyday people, philosophy itself becomes a critical disposition, wrestling with desire in the face of death, wrestling with dialog in the face of dogmatism, and wrestling with democracy. Trying to keep alive very fragile democratic experiments in the face of structures of denomination; patriarchy, white supremacy, imperial power, state power, all those concentrated forms of power that are not accountable to the people who are affected by it." I agree with Cornel that it is philosophy that does its best to keep power sources accountable, therefore, philosophy has a great deal of importance in the Democratic government.
to the church, West says "Surrendering ones arrogance and pride in the face of divine revelation." this is us staying accountable to the God and philosophy affects how we react to God. This view has implications for Cedarville in that there is a continual process in which philosophy helps us with our humility, reminding us that we do not know nor can we understand it all. Instead of getting caught up in the 'know it all' Greek Student mentality.
I think that most people could benefit from hearing these clips, but I want to focus more on the first one with Martha Nussbaum. I think that philosophy can and should play a big part in how we “do” democracy. I know plenty of people who vote based on which party they like regardless of which person would actually be the best for the country. I think Nussbaum had a valid point when she said that the party system shouldn't be viewed as two competing opponents; rather we should engage in thinking through who will be a better president or even look to see which the two candidates have in common. I think Christians should engage in democracy in a way that challenges them to think and not just blinding cast a ballet.
-Joel (11:00)
Post a Comment