|
Tuesday, 10 October 2006 15:28 |
By JOHN NORTH
HENDERSONVILLE ÇƒÓ American philosopher Hilary Putnam, known for frequently changing his own positions, drew praise for his intellectual honesty from Keya Maitra during her Oct. 3 lecture at UNC Ashevilleës Kellogg Center.
Maitra, an assistant professor of philosophy at UNCA, addressed Putnamës famous quotation, "We arenët brains in a vat."
About 30 people attended the Great Quotes lecture, which is part of the annual series co-sponsored by the UNCA Philosophy Department and the Institute for Applied Philosophy. Maitraës first book, "On Putnam," was published in 2002.
She
began by noting that she would be focusing on Putnam and skepticism,
adding that Putnam ranks as "one of the top three" philosophers of the
20th century. His focus is on philosophy of mind, philosophy of
language and philosophy of science.
"As a philosopher, he took a lot of heat" for radically changing his philosophical positions, Maitra said,
Putnam began as
a trained philosopher with an emphasis on physics and mathematics, she
noted. "He held a flat-world realism ÇƒÓ no nonsense."
Later, Putnam
decided his philosophy "didnët work," so he adopted "a view of internal
realism, which weëll talk about tonight." Now, Maitra noted, Putnam
embraces "common-sense realism."
She cited one
philosopher who calls Putnam "the moving target" and says, "Donët try
to talk on Putnam ... because heës always changing."
To the contrary,
Maitra said she feels Putnamës changing thinking signifies "growth and
development ÇƒÓ out of integrity, not movement."
Instead of changing posititions, itës a matter of evolution to understand Putnam, she said.
In the year
2000, he converted to Judaism, becoming an orthodox Jew and teaching in
Jerusalem. "He wanted to see what it was like" to be in the shoes of a
persecuted people, Maitra explained.
In the 1960s,
Putnam taught at Harvard University, where he was the faculty advisor
to a radical Maoist student group. Later, Maitra said, Putnam said he
found "inherent flaws" in Maoism that coincided with the flaws he found
in capitalism.
With a note of
exasperation, Maitra said, "I wish people would read Putnam more than
they do. Heës just a brilliant writer." She especially recommended
reading some of his later works, such as "Realism With a Human Face,"
which she termed a "great book," and "Reason, Truth and History," from
which her lecture was based.
She then turned to skepticism, which she defined as "the idea of how do we know? How can we be sure?"
With a smile, she asked the attendees, "How can you be sure youëre here at 7:45 (p.m.) listening to me?"
After a pause, Maitra asserted that "whatever you say, I can push it, through skepticism.
"Skepticism also
has a certain kind of intellectual attraction," she said. In some
circles, "itës considered ǃÚcoolë to doubt everything." She likened the
aforementioned radical skepticism to people who hold conspiracy
theories.
Maitra noted
that Putnam, "a great writer," devised a scenario in which he asked
people to imagine that all sentient beings unknowingly have their
brains in a vat ÇƒÓ just nerve endings and impulses, with an evil
scientist outside controlling the situation.
"What Putnam would say is, ǃÚNo, you donët have to worry" about being just a brain in a vat, she said.
Specifically,
Maitra said Putnam successfully argues, "What kind of philosophical
framework allows the possibility of a scenario of a brain-in-a-vat?"
Therefore, he
reasons that truth is essentially non-epistemic, meaning "Truth will
always outrun you," and "Your ideas are in your head. Somehow, there
are ways for you to get out of your head and see if ideas correspond."
The "real
correspondence is when what you think matches with how things are,"
Maitra said of Putnamës view. "For Putnam, thatës Truth with a capital
ǃÚT.ë"
She noted that
Putnam held that "you cannot be outside of your head, no matter how
much you try." Further, he posited that "once you make truth dependent
on correspondence, thereës no way you can make" anything certain.
Maitra then
turned to other prominent examples of skepticism, noting that "it comes
out in (18th century Scottish philosopher David) Hume a lot" and the
recent film "The Matrix" revolves around the question, "How can you be
sure?"
"Putnam, I
think, would say to the skeptic: ǃÚAs far as brains in a vat, I refuse
to answer your question because your question itself is ill-conceived.ë"
Using the theory
that meanings of words are determined by their relationships, Putnam
would say, "I cannot coherently articulate that Iëm a brain in a vat
without knowing it," Maitra said.
"He says in his very elegant way, ǃÚThis is very self-defeating.ë"
To that end, Maitra said with a smile, "One could say a brain in a vat is an overpaid philosopherës parlor game."
However, the UNCA professor added, "I donët think thatës the case."
She then said,
"I want to show you how close a skepticsë position is to a relativistës
... If thereës no absolute truth, then you say you can never be certain
of anything."
Maitra then
described skepticism as "a form of intellectual elitism. For tolerance
to be possible, we need to see beyond relativism and skepticism. Hume
says in his own humorous way, in the real world of living, his
skepticism has to take a back seat."
Ultimately, Maitra said a radical skeptic would be paralyzed by doubt from taking any action.
In noting the
close relationship between relativism and skepticism, respectively, she
said, "One says nothing really matters ÇƒÓ there is no truth, and the
other says you can never be certain."
While one can say, "We cannot get to absolute truth," Maitra noted, "that doesnët mean we donët have some truth."
Putnam, taking a
pragmatic tack, contends that "everything can be revised," according to
Maitra. "At the end of the day, the elitist skepticism doesnët do
anything for you. It eats the hand that feeds you."
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
