Andrew Taggart

Philosophical Counselor

Month: September, 2011

An invitation to the reader to join me in a philosophical conversation

A Cordial Invitation

I’d like to invite you to have a philosophical conversation with me. If you’re living outside of New York City, then the conversation would take place over Skype. If you’re in the City, then we’d take a stroll through Central Park.

The economy we’d be engaged in would be a gift economy. I’d be opening up a space in which a philosophical conversation could unfold (that would be my gift), and for your part you’d be offering me or another a gift. That gift could simply be a head nod, a thank you, an object you made, a donation, whatever. And, as I say, it could be offered to me or to someone else.

If you’d like to have a conversation with me, you can get in touch with me either by filling out the contact form on my Contact page or by posting a comment below.

A Reasonable Justification

Giving and receiving, Alasdair MacIntyre claims in his book Dependent Rational Animals, is always already asymmetrical. It follows that gifting is not bartering inasmuch as no precise equivalence can be drawn between the original gift and subsequent gifts. The claim, for instance, that I could fully repay my parents for their raising me well is a conceptual mistake and this for two reasons. First, there is no common measure by which to assess how I could repay them for years of excellent child rearing. Second, there is no notion of fullness, i.e., no notion of finally paying everything back. The point MacIntyre is driving at is that we’re always enmeshed in a web of dependencies and debts. In my case, then, in virtue of having been given much, I owe much to my parents and, by extension, to others.  This would account for my current offering.

A Just Expectation

There is a story that the Buddhist Joseph Epstein tells in Benedict’s Dharma that helps me to clarify where my Aristotelianism departs from Buddhism (a promissory note: a larger argument against the egoism/altruism dichotomy in the future). Epstein writes,

When I was living and practicing in India, I went to the local bazaar to buy some fruits and vegetables. A little beggar boy came up to me and stretched out his hand. Without much hesitation, I gave him one of the oranges that I had just bought. What happened next proved very illuminating to me. The boy just walked away–no nod of thanks, no smile, no acknowledgement whatsoever. It was only then that I realized I had had an expectation in that simple act of giving. I wanted “something” in return, even if it was just a nod. Purifying our motives, so that we can give simply out of love and kindness, without any expectation at all, is part of bringing the virtue of generosity to perfection.

I don’t think so. By my lights, just generosity is structured according to gifts given in order to fulfill basic needs and forms of gratitude by which we honor the gifts we’ve received, we recognize gift-givers as gift-givers, and we “discharge” some of our debts over the years. Epstein’s anecdote is best interpreted as a story not about pure and impure motives but about the perils, the human and humane costs, of extreme economic deprivation.

The Economist: ‘New middle classes rise up’

In “The New Middle Classes Rise Up” (September 3, 2011, The Economist), the editors state that emerging giants such as India, Brazil, and China are beginning to show signs of middle class unrest. A growing middle class has become more vociferous about making anti-corruption claims and demanding greater comforts. One expert quoted says that “the middle class is asserting its citizenship right to get government services without a bribe.”

I, for one, would welcome a middle class in India, China, and Brazil that asserted more than enlightened self-interest. Some notion of the common good might be nice for a change.

Friday meditation: Rumi’s ‘What’s Not Here’

What’s Not Here

Rumi (1207-73)

I started out on this road, call it
love or emptiness. I only know what’s
 
not here: resentment seeds, back-
scratching greed, worrying about out-
 
outcome, fear of people. When a bird gets
free, it doesn’t go back for remnant
 
left on the bottom of the cage! Close
by, I’m rain. Far off, a cloud of fire.
 
I seem restless, but I am deeply at ease.
Branches tremble; the roots are still. 
 
I am a universe in a handful of dirt,
whole when totally demolished. Talk
 
about choices does not apply to me. 
While intelligence considers options,
 
I am somewhere lost in the wind.
 

Lectio Divina Reading Questions

Rumi says that, in this state of being, “[t]alk about choices does not apply to me.” What does he mean here? Why wouldn’t talk about choices apply? And what would it mean for you–how would that be–if the game of choosing were temporarily suspended? 

Wendell Berry on the proper education for young people

The following is an excerpt from Wendell Berry’s “Thoughts in the Presence of Fear,” Orion Magazine (Autumn 2001). The article was published shortly after September 11, 2001. As far as I can make it, we have made little progress on devising a “proper education [that] enables young people to put their lives in order.” My friends and I are working on it.

XXVI. The complexity of our present trouble suggests as never before that we need to change our present concept of education. Education is not properly an industry, and its proper use is not to serve industries, either by job-training or by industry-subsidized research. It’s proper use is to enable citizens to live lives that are economically, politically, socially, and culturally responsible. This cannot be done by gathering or “accessing” what we now call “information” – which is to say facts without context and therefore without priority. A proper education enables young people to put their lives in order, which means knowing what things are more important than other things; it means putting first things first.

XXVII. The first thing we must begin to teach our children (and learn ourselves) is that we cannot spend and consume endlessly. We have got to learn to save and conserve. We do need a “new economy”, but one that is founded on thrift and care, on saving and conserving, not on excess and waste. An economy based on waste is inherently and hopelessly violent, and war is its inevitable by-product. We need a peaceable economy.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 335 other followers