In a recent NDPR review, Nomy Arpaly, reviews an edited volume on a topic close to my heart: procrastination. But the main sub-text of the review is quickly revealed: "Since the book's subtitle is "Philosophical Essays on Procrastination," a warning might be in order: strictly speaking, some of the essays are not philosophical, and some appear to sit on the borderline between moral psychology and just plain psychology or economics. Some articles even dabble in (scientifically savvy) self-help. The first part of the book consists mostly of borderline articles. It opens with an article by George Ainslie which I would not call philosophical." So, according to Arpaly some chapters are "clearly within the borders of philosophy," while in others "It can become hard to find the philosophy in these science-oriented articles, though again I sympathize with the authors' and editors' desire to make philosophical discussion of the topic more empirically informed."
Now, I am not against boundary-policing of philosophy by philosophers. (Better by US than by THEM!) But Arpaly, who is a well known and gifted philosopher, never quite explains what she means by "philosophy." From her review it is clear she contrasts philosophy with "science" as well as "self-help," although she appears to commend "one advice-laced article -- by Mark White -- appears to be both more philosophical than others." So, being self-help does not prevent a piece from being philosophical (Stoics & Wittgensteiners among our readers may rest assured!) But...sometimes philosophy masquerades as science (think of political economy, rational choice theory, [put your favorite example here]) or can be found lurking within or (more likely) at the cutting edge of science [e.g., Einstein's conceptual innovations--rewarded with a Schillp volume]. (Note I am not making the historical point that philosophy and science once overlapped considerably.) Now I agree with Arpaly that "equations and diagrams" need not be philosophical, but why not?
Here's my moral: if we engage in philosophical boundary guarding, we should make some effort at a positive definition.
Recent Comments