virtual philosopher

Michael Sandel on Justice - Philosophy Gets Its Virtual Socrates

Michael Sandel's Justice website is a superb example of how academics can use the Internet to reach out to a world audience. Based on his renowned Harvard lecture course, it combines slick recordings of his 12 lectures (first 3 available already via a YouTube link) - which are also being broadcast on public service TV in the States - with associated reading lists, back up material discussion groups, etc. And his new book: Justice: What's the Right Thing to Do? Eventually all academics should be able to create resources like this...and the exclusive and insular idea of a University (symbolised by those Oxbridge colleges with high walls and gatekeepers) can evolve. Although he believes the website isn't a full substitute for sitting in that lecture theatre in Harvard, it is as close as most people will get to being there, and certainly one of the most important attempts to bring philosophical debate to a wider audience in recent years. Some of Hubert Dreyfus' worries about virtual learning may still apply, but the experience probably beats what most university students get these days in the lower-ranking colleges.

In the UK, many of us still look back fondly to Bryan Magee's BBC television series 'Men of Ideas' (not a title that would work today) and 'The Great Philosophers' (search 'Bryan Magee' in YouTube for long extracts), but since then, apart from  Michael Ignatieff's interviews with thinkers, philosophy on television hasn't really achieved what it might have done (instead we've got the sugared pill of biographical sketches which tend to play down the ideas, or else philosophy lite, or philosophy as self-help). TED.com's popularity, though, should make those commissioners realize the appeal of dynamic speakers presenting ideas they believe in.

It helps, of course, that Sandel is an excellent communicator, engaging in a quasi-Socratic dialogue with questioners even in a large lecture group. In fact, his presentation is so good, that it is easy to be drawn into his worldview (as an antidote, read Michael Sandel Wants To Talk To You About Justice which includes some interesting pointers about where he is coming from and why some philosophers disagree quite strongly with his approach).

I've interviewed Michael Sandel twice - for the podcasts Ethics Bites and Philosophy Bites

Michael Sandel interview on Genetic Enhancement in Sport

Michael Sandel interview on What Shouldn't Be Sold

Sandel gave the 2009 Reith Lecture Series on the theme of 'A New Citizenship' (basically, the themes from his Justice course). You can listen to all 4 Reith lectures here.

Obama's Cosmopolitan Existentialism

Cosmopolitanism, the philosophy which foregrounds common humanity while recognizing difference, seems to be the philosophical underpinning of President Obama's approach to international relations. Carlin Romano's fascinating article 'Obama, Philosopher in Chief' (c/o the brilliant Arts and Letters Daily) analyses his speeches linking them to Kwame Anthony Appiah's thinking on the topic (you can listen to Appiah on Cosmopolitanism on the Philosophy Bites podcast) - though Romano economically describes Appiah as 'Ghanian-American' (more on Appiah's genealogy here).

Romano claims that Obama is 'countering' Machiavelli with his advocacy of a consensual politics over coercion, and recognition of rights over party politics. Cynics might note that the expression of such views is completely consistent with Machiavelli's approach (since Machiavelli is all for appearing to take the moral high ground). But surely, as Romano points out, we have entered a new age when an American President sounds like an existentialist:

"Our history has always been the sum total of the choices made and the actions taken by each individual man and woman."

Can we now hope that the US people will be encouraged to apply reason to the area of religion too? While some way ahead of the UK in politics, the US seems to be lagging behind in metaphysics.

Michael Sandel profile by Jonathan Derbyshire

2009 Reith Lecturer Michael Sandel profiled by Jonathan Derbyshire in The New Statesman. This article gives an excellent introduction to Sandel's philosophical background and how it informs his lecture series on 'A New Citizenship'. Sandel, in his role as a public philosopher advocates clarity and a desire to stimulate public debate. Derbyshire is sympathetic to Sandel's view that we have sacrificed too much of the public good on the altar of economics.

If you want to find out more about Sandel's ideas, the best place to start (at least until his book Justice is published) is Public Philosophy: Essays on Morality in Politics

Or, of course, to listen to the two interviews with him on Philosophy Bites.  Also there are very useful links about this year's Reith Lecturescoming through on Twitter on Reith2009. 

Photograph shows Michael Sandel interviewed for the Philosophy Bites podcast shortly before he gave his first 2009 Reith Lecture. David Edmonds, the other half of Philosophy Bites, (also co-author with John Eidnow of Wittgenstein's Poker, Rousseau's Dog, and Bobby Fisher Goes to War) is holding the microphone, and I'm on the right looking a bit stiff.

Free Video Lecture Courses in Philosophy

Academic Earth has two Yale Philosophy lecture courses - one on Death and one on Political Philosophy - available free from the Philosophy section of their site.

These are great times for autodidacts!

Machiavelli is Always Relevant

Machiavelli's book The Prince seems relevant to almost every political age. A recent article in The New Yorker brings out some of the insights into the present reading Machiavelli today can offer.

Quentin Skinner's podcast on The Prince on Philosophy Bites sets the book in its original context.

Podcast on Mill's On Liberty

Richard Reeves, author of a recent biography of John Stuart Mill, is the interviewee on this episode of Philosophy Bites:

Listen to Richard Reeves on Mill's On Liberty

Read 'Mill is Dead White Male with Something to Say'

Anthony Appiah interview on Cosmopolitanism

Anthony Appiah, author of the excellent book  Cosmpolitanism: Ethics in a World of Strangers, explains how he believes it is possible to combined universalism about ethics with acknowledgement and celebration of difference...This is part of the podcast Philosophy Bites. David Edmonds introduces the interview.

Listen to Anthony Appiah interviewed on Cosmopolitanism

Philosophers Advising Governments...

Philosophers don't have a particularly good record when it comes to giving practical advice to politicians...Plato didn't manage to pull it off; Machiavelli never weasled his way back into a position of power after being dismissed (though most politicians read The Prince, whether or not they admit to it - and if they've read it closely, they shouldn't admit to it);  Rousseau had a go at giving advice, but again it didn't really work; there are a number of philosophers in the British House of Lords, some of whom make very useful contributions to government, and quite a few British MPs have studied some philosophy (often PPE at Oxford), but on the whole philosophers underperform when it comes to impacting on the political world.

You can listen to a very interesting podcast of Philip Pettit on The Philosophers' Zone, talking about his involvement with the Spanish government (this is a surprise!). Listen to Philip Pettit here (there's a transcript too if you don't want to listen).

Also, I interviewed Mary Warnock on Philosophy and Public Life for Philosophy Bites.

Free Speech has To Respect Religion Says UN Leader - How Exactly?

It is not clear to me how it is possible to live up to the latest UN pronouncement on free speech. You can read a Reuters' Report on this here.

If all those who speak, write, express their views have to respect all religious sensitivities, then what can anyone say? Some religious group is likely to be offended by almost any expression of a view. Does the UN want to stop us watching The Life of Brian, Jerry Springer the Opera, etc? Will atheists have to keep quiet about their beliefs for fear of offending religious sensitivities? Watch out Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens and co. And how does all this square with the US First Amendment?

Philip Hensher wrote an interesting piece in The Guardian on this topic in 2006.

Richard Tuck on Free Riding - on Philosophy Bites podcast

The Free Rider Problem has been much discussed by philosophers and economists...Richard Tuck has an original line on it.

Listen to Richard Tuck on Free Riding