Many great philosophers were bachelors. (Feat. Mary Midgleys philosophy)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 17 чер 2021
- #marymidgley #midgley #midgleysphilosophy
The list of philosophers who were lifelong bachelors are impressive: David Hume and Adam Smith. Plato, Thomas Aquinas, Thomas Hobbes, Rene Descartes, John Locke, Benedict Spinoza, Isaac Newton, Gottfried Leibniz, Voltaire, Immanuel Kant, Edward Gibbon, Arthur Schopenhauer, Søren Kierkegaard, Friedrich Nietzsche, and Ludwig Wittgenstein.
Why were they bachelors and is that better as a philosopher? I ponder about this and more in this video.
God idé med placering i det rum. Giver god mening mht. til det du snakker om
Thank you for the video :)
Yes, you are right, this is a very peculiar observation. One could get the impression that these bachelors were in some other way married or devoted to precisely this:
The art of writing.
Another somewhat peculiar thing is that Socrates - who was undoubtedly married and by the look of it a very bad husband - as we know was also a passionate opponent of the art of the written word. And even though, almost all of these prominent bachelor philosophers on your list, at least the divine Plato, Locke and all the amentioned bachelors afterwards, were more or less all engaged with the philosophy of Socrates through the very same art that he denied.
So many problems set forth in Plato's dialogues - and so little time! If one is to be a dedicated philosopher, can one put forth the dedication it demands to be a husband and a father at he same time, you ask? It is said that the sons of Socrates was very badly behaved. And this is precisely his point of critique regarding fatherhood: that the great statesmen and rulers of the past weren't able to educate their own children, because of their dedication to governing, thereby neglecting their families. (Meno, steph. 87 >)
Anyway, I would argue that a philosopher must devote most of his life to the study of philosophy to become one. To philosopize is to engage with the philosophic tradition and it is surely vast and complex, which requires an enormous strength of solitary work on end.
But again, this is a disadvantage: for if philosophy is to become acquainted with life (or politics?), as I think you are correct in stating, I feel that this must be awakened from the very philosophic proponents who are themselves engaged with life to reenact the true spirit of Socrates:
Philosophy as conversation in the agora, in the sports arena, in the supermarket, in the class rooms of our schools, anywhere we could think of it - to open up the potentiality of the human "Nous".
This is not to underevaluate the greatness of Plato and his exceptional writings as a great deal of philosophy is to be learned from them (I recommend Schleiermachers Introduction to the Platonic Dialogues, p.15-17). But, as Plato himself probably says in one of his Letters, I think the "Seventh" (it is debated whether the Letters are spurious): "My dialogues was just for the fun of it. And of course, to make Socrates young and beautiful again" (by paraphrase). Plato has done exactly so in honoring his great master.
Through the imitative art of the dialogues, which - as we know are at the very foundation of Western Philosophy - the spirit of Socrates is alive in philosophic circles, but waiting to claim the potential that is owed to his master who died a martyr's death:
The conversations must protrude out into the streets, where they by inheritance of his martyrdom truly belong.
But how is this to be done, when democracy since the execution of Socrates more or less have denied the marriage of philosophy to politics?
Thanks for your insights into this peculiarity Rene. I’m inclined to agree with you that philosophy must have a wide spectrum and philosophy must take to the streets. Philosophy is very much about morals and morals is politics. You have Many good observations about a philosophical indeepht dedication. I’m still on middle Ground if a bachelor philosophers dedication to writing philosophy is somehow more supreme Per se. I still think whatever you do in life you sacrifice something else. Even if you marry or not. But their are still great dedicated philosophers who were married. But yeah were they great husbonds/Wifes? That’s another thing. I personally try to strive for being both a good husbond and father and a dedicated philosopher. But yeah that’s hard work with all of it and the end result would be judged later. It is a process really. I also think a true philosopher knows when not too philosophize. Its a balance.
I don't know which is better, to be a bachelor or not, but it seems to me that it's often not really much of a choice. One can either find oneself in an environment and circumstances that result in either meeting potential spouses or not, and ultimately to find a fitting enough match or not, and eventually to either find oneself having settled down with someone or not. Plus, it's a matter of luck whether one is even capable of having children, regardless of whether one has happened to find a potential spouse to have them with.
Here's are an interesting related question: is it (nowadays) better for a philosopher to come from a divorce home (e.g., from a home where the parents had divorced and went on to start other families with different partners, potentially both having had more kids with other people)? That way, the philosopher would have grown between two families, getting close exposure to more variety of people since young age (and potentially also having more variety in siblings, in number, age, personality, or some combination of these).
That’s also an aspect of this issue. But I Think most of the philosophers on the list choose actively too not marry. They were to self-obsoved in their own thinking. But yeah some were misfortunate not make a relationship work for Them like Nietzsche.
To me philosophy is when a person reflects their external world without their baggage getting in the way. Similar to meditation but more directed, not as directed as religion. If parents have a greater opportunity to examine their own baggage, it might make them a better philosopher.