John Chaffes The Philosophers Way - Essay Example

?Inset Introduction If there is a discipline that has shaped not only the and scope of human thinking, but also thecourse of human history, then it is philosophy. Many philosophy books have been written but the importance of each book is pegged on its uniqueness. In turn, the uniqueness of each philosophy book is based on the fact that every philosopher has his own distinct worldview. It is for this same reason that The Philosopher's Way by John Chaffe has been acclaimed as not only being an interesting read, but as key to understanding philosophical concepts and worldviews that are parallel to the ones people have largely acquired mainly through non-inquisitive elements of acculturation. Indeed, the contents of the book are rich enough to match the grasp that Chaffe has as an associate Professor of Philosophy lecturing at the City University of New York. The dexterity and commitment of Dr. Chaffe to philosophy as a discipline is also underscored by his Critical Thinking Program, which brings into involvement, over 25 different faculties and over 3,000 students. Alongside the many workshops and conference presentations, the many books and a myriad of articles that John Chaffe has penned down multiply attest to his commitment and unparalleled contribution to philosophy. Several grants and the selection of Chaffe as the New York Scholar of the Year also clearly illustrate the unique and authoritative place of John Chaffe in philosophy. However, John Chaffe’s The Philosopher's Way does not merely borrow its importance from the person and fame of its author, but from the manner in which concepts to thinking and perception are introduced and discussed. This makes the book become a very powerful tool for not only the shaping of the reader’s worldview, but also inculcating an array of problem-solving skills and techniques. One of the concepts that have been carefully and insightfully touched on by Jaffe is that of what is real? What is true? The importance of this topic is that it introduces the important concept of appearance versus reality. In this topic, Chaffe explains that at times, what appears to be true is not always the reality. Several phenomena abound to underline this fact. For instance, even though the atmosphere is colorless, yet it has a lot of microbes in it. Similarly, there are instance where in the heat of the day, a tarmac road may appear to be covered with aquatic substance from a distance, yet the reality dictates otherwise. Chaffe maintains that such incongruence between appearance and reality is always brought about either by wrong judgments (or interpretation), or through a complex interplay among the elements of nature which the human mind cannot accurately interpret. The supposed bending of a ruler when it is inside transparent glass water under the sun for instance is not in itself the case, even if the human mind and eye takes the same to be true. On the contrary, the ‘bending’ of the ruler is only caused by refraction of light. To avoid the pitfalls of making wrong judgments, Chaffe recommends that it is imperative that people search comprehensively for details that are pertinent to the matter at hand. This will have the individual acting from an informed position. Chaffe maintains that it is upon an individual having obtained and thought through the information that is pertinent to the subject matter that such a person can be deemed a thinker. The gravity of the matter is that to Chaffe, the ability to think and not act on perception forms the core of definition of man, as opposed to an animal. While animals because of the sighted perception act on their instincts, man as an intelligent being is expected to be rational in synthesizing the image before him and acting upon the same information, being endowed with superior faculties for reasoning. On a point of reflection, Chaffe’s call to move from the culture of acting and judging from the facade is a matter that is relevant to the present society and totally pervades every crevice of the entire globe. The call to reason, instead of acting on appearance indeed deals phrenology a coup de grace. At the core of phrenology was racism, since the prevailing logic among phrenologists was that by looking at one’s race and shape of one’s head, it was possible to determine whether one was amenable to criminality or not; and thereby helping to the identification of criminal suspects. In America, this pseudoscience led to the proliferation of the African American in the US cells on accounts of crimes that were not even provable. The call to stop the consideration of the facade as the truth is still relevant up to the moment, and is epitomized in Prof. Henry Louis Gates’ incident. On July 16th, 2009, this Harvard University professor was forcefully arrested by a local police officer, when attempting to get into his Cambridge Massachusetts residence. The police officer who carried out the arrest said that he thought of Prof. Gates as a burglar. It is a fact that such an arrest was not really warranted by mistaken identity, but by the fact that Prof Gates Jr. is a black man, so the cop did not get acquainted with the prospects of such a man living among the intelligentsia and the socially polished. Nonetheless, the incident still underlines the presence of the mistake of judging by appearance. It is easy to see that the above situation was inspired by wrong judgment. This wrong judgment in turn was catapulted by the fallacious belief that African Americans are less financially endowed, and all exceptions (if any) to this observation are thieves. The same call remains very relevant to all people in the 21st century, as an era that is getting increasingly punctuated with values tending towards materialism and consumerism. Many relationships would heal if ladies ceased considering a man’s financial or material endowment, and if young men desist from following the outside appearances and sex appeal, when looking for a life partner. It is most advisable and best if parties to a relationship looked at long lasting values such as great and promising potential, character, aspirations, values and resolve (commitment). On the other hand, the flipside of relying on appearance is that it is very readily susceptible to change. A long walk along a tarmac road readily convinces elementary school-goers that there is no aquatic substance that covers the road, just as the removal of a ruler from glass water readily shows that the ruler is totally intact. In like manner, wealth is a very inaccurate and too short term, a yardstick for describing a man, just as judging a lady by her posterior and bust is fallacious. Both yardsticks are irreparably and significantly altered by the aging process after a time. However, potential, character, aspirations, values and resolve are the very foundation to any long-lasting relationship or venture. The corollary to this is that the best and most sober actions are those that look at long term consequences and verifiable information as the premise for a conclusion and action. Thus, the bottom-line of Chaffe’s standpoint is that mankind as an assemblage of sentient beings must be guided by reason and not instincts that emanate from the failure to clearly interpret appearance. Therefore, before making any conclusion, people should consider the relevant information, in order to avoid the carrying out of otiose actions. Another important concept that Chaffe introduces for debate and exposition is that of freedom. This is in the fourth chapter. In this chapter, Chaffe tackles the relation between determinism and freedom. On one hand, free will has it that by making certain choices, human beings can shape their destiny for the better or worse. The same assertion can also take the past perfect form so that it is extended to mean that the world as it is, is a consequence of all the actions and choices exerted by man. On the other hand, determinism has it that the world and the fullness therein are an accumulation of factors that are beyond man’s control, so that even in the face of human action, the desired results are neither obtained, nor can permanent and desirable change be wrought by a sleight of hand. It helps a great deal that even after deliberating on the underpinnings and examples of determinism and free will, Chaffe leaves the decision for the reader to decide whether people are indeed free, or whether their fate and circumstances are already pre-determined. It is not in doubt that there are far reaching repercussions that stem from choosing either of the sides, and Chaffe’s resistance to taking sides is a matter that must have been elicited by this knowledge. On the side of free will, certain strengths abound. Many philosophers find ready consensus in the doctrine that man is a free moral agent and as such, can exercise his free will to make choices that will affect profoundly and irrevocably, his future and destiny. If there is no free will, then it would be impossible to speak of liberty, freedom or even individual resolve. The legitimacy and existence of free will is easily and readily made manifest in choices such as hard work, the choosing of a marriage partner, the selection of a career or profession, religion and ideological beliefs, and tastes and preferences. On the other hand, determinism or those who believe in it maintains that factors that shape human life and conditions are already preset or pre-determined by factors or forces that are outside man’s control. As such, human beings do not have the prerogatives to control these external elements. Thus, an individual’s state of life, his destiny and fate, and the state of the universe are as they are because of the factors that are already preset. These factors are outside man’s control and containment. The strengths of determinism are illustrated in several areas of existence such as the transcendental nature of the universe. Cosmology and metaphysics indeed confirm that forces of nature such as gravity, senescence, aging and death are far beyond the grasp and control by man. Certain world economic systems also vindicate determinism. Specifically, capitalism is drawn upon frameworks that make it hard for the poor to get rich. In the first place, capital and other forces of production are usually concentrated in the hands in the few rich capital owners. This situation makes it easier for the rich capital owner to access and secure other incentives to trade such as banking, insurance, affordable and efficient transporting system, security and communication. The same situation fully characterizes international politics and economy also. Given that developed countries have superior incentives to trade, on trading with Less Developed Countries (LDCs), the later will always be shortchanged. For instance, developed countries have all undergone industrialization, meaning that they are able to produce more superior products and in surplus. Such products will be in high demand, upon making it to LDCs which either have no industries or still have fledgling industrial bases. Resultantly, LDCs are bound to get poorer as their industries become faced out because of the unfair competition from developed countries which can produce far much advanced merchandise. Developed countries are in turn bound to realize accruals in the form of ready markets which are totally free from high tariffs and government subsidies. As a matter of fact, it is Karl Marx who laid grounds for economic determinism in economics, in his theory of Class Consciousness and Antagonism. The capitalist system that Karl Marx describes in Das Capital is one in which the bourgeoisie control and own all the factors of production, while the proletariat is left with nothing. This sets a predetermined system where the masses and all that are sired by them are condemned to poverty, irrespective of their initiatives. Consequently, in a capitalistic system, the gap between the rich and the poor increasingly widens, no matter how diligently the poor may toil and moil. So strong is the element of economic determinism as is envisioned by Karl Marx that he rightly prognosticates that it takes a revolution by the masses to disband such an exploitative system from existence or operation. Another testimony to the above capitalistic system being permeated with determinism is the fact that there is no purely capitalistic system in the world. Even the US, the country that engaged Russia in a Cold War in order to contain the spread of communism is not purely capitalistic. America up to now continues to fuse elements of socialism with capitalism, so that therein, one may find: welfare programs such as food stamps, homes, and subsidized education and healthcare systems. At the core of the mixing of these modes of production is the fact that so economically determinist is capitalism, that not only does it condemn others into perpetual poverty, but also, no truly just government should run such an economic system that is devoid of human face. However, taking either of the concepts or schools of thought with strictness leaves behind serious pitfalls. For instance, if one takes free will in isolation and as the absolute truth, several real life problems are likely to emerge. For instance, even in the face of being a free moral agent, there are instances where the exercising of choice is barred. Firstly, man seldom has the capacity to choose a cause that is contrary to his predisposition. To this effect, questions may legitimately arise whether man is captive of his own temperance or predisposition. Likewise, man cannot out of his free will, do as he pleases since both the common law and the civil law constrain him. The presence of the common law illustrates the inherent factors which govern, modify or limit the actions of man, while civil law exemplifies the existence of external forces and factors which shape and compel or constrain such acts that are carried out by man. In another wavelength, free will is undermined fundamentally by the fact that the free moral agent which is man has limited knowledge and may thus make choices that are bereft of adequate information. The same man, even in the possession of full knowledge, may be imperfect in predisposition and act not out of reason, but out of his base master passion or emotions. A clear testimony that undercuts free will is the present world as it is, together with its systems. Despite man’s desperate attempt to bring ameliorations to the world’s economic and socio-political systems and the many radical inroads that he has made in all sectors of technology, class difference, hunger, famine, disease, death, war, insecurity and crime, political instability and prejudice still abound. These are stark reminders of the weaknesses that dot the doctrine of free will. Similarly, to remain assertive and discriminatively in favor of free will is to immediately invoke another problem. The problem is that one will have said that “Man is the measure of all things, of things that are, so that they are; and of things that are not, so that they are not,” in the quest to show free will as being supreme (to determinism). The bottom-line is that even in the face of making a decision that is totally embedded on full knowledge; man cannot necessarily usher in the desired change. For instance, even after choosing to lead the healthiest lifestyle, man or an HIV/AIDS patient will eventually succumb to death. Even the movement that is trans-humanism or post-humanism cannot solve such a determinant force as death since no sooner will man through such technology bring the deceased back to immortality, than for philosophers to argue that the “resurrected” man is not the same identity as the deceased. Man even in the light of free will is certainly not on top of forces of nature. On the converse, the implications of sticking to determinism are far reaching and too hard to explain away. The assertion that the world, its systems and the state of life are as they are because they are predetermined, brings into play, very serious philosophical questions. Firstly, moral and ethical issues that touch on the law and criminal justice systems emerge. Particularly, determinism seems to insinuate that responsible actions and restraint are either too feeble to produce positive change or that they are not the agents of social change. However, in the event that the same standpoint is applied to criminal justice, the society in its entirety is subject to collapse. The full and unquestioned adoption of determinism is poised to set a precedence where one rapes or commits any other crime, and defends himself that having no free will; he lacked all the controls against the urge for the crime. The criminal justice system fundamentally relies on the doctrine of free moral agency. This problem is based on the fact that determinism, by negating free will, removes the element of responsible action, from the individual. The fact of the matter is that there is no way in which an individual who cannot exercise free will, can be accused of a crime. In the event that all his actions are predetermined, then such an individual must be absolved of criminal accusations. It is for this same reason that exemptions to crimes are non comps mentis (when the criminal is mentally ill) and when the suspect is considerably shown to have acted in self-defense. Non comps mentis leaves the suspect with the inability to make choices or exercise free will since the same require soundness of mind. On the other hand, self-defense leaves the suspect with no room to exercise free will since life-threatening circumstances leaves one with no recourse to actualize acts that ensure self-preservation. It is the same vein, responsible action works together with free will, so that an individual can work successfully towards the realization of his goals. Usually, those who excel without cheating in academics are those who in times past, had set within themselves, certain resolutions, to work towards excellence. On the other hand, believing that all things including examination results are already predetermined is almost akin to tendering resignation to fate, complacency, lethargy and status quo. Another importance of determination as a school of thought is seen in the field of theology, particularly in Christian philosophy. In the event that it is taken at face value, then it means that the act of God choosing His elect is far much supreme that it overrules the role of man as a free moral agent. The danger with this standpoint is that it forecasts a deity who is autocratic, since he makes decision for mankind and proceeds to punish mankind for the same decisions. Although Christianity in St. Paul’s teaching to the Romans (Chapter VIII) fully asserts the validity of predestination, yet, the same faith does not repudiate the role of personal choice. It is the choice of an individual to accept or reject the Christian faith that makes him a believer or a nonbeliever, since God cannot overrule man’s capacity to exercise free will by exercising it on man’s behalf. In the same vein, the utmost belief in determinism as the summation of the truth can serve as the very bane of important institutions such as schools and rehabilitation centers. Just as free will is strictly imperative for proper schooling, there is no rehabilitation center that can effectively run, in the absence of free will. In the event that a drug addict or a compulsive substance abuser has accepted that he was born thus (determinism), there is no way such a person will be effectively helped, even if such a person should be presented to the best rehabilitation center, the world over. In full view of the above underpinnings that characterize determinism and free will, it would be more accurate to state that neither does determinism overrule free will, nor does free will overrule determinism. On the contrary, these philosophical problems that have been deliberated on above will not be soluble; if there will not be the tampering of determinism and free will and vise versa. The inconsistency between the world as it is, and the world as it should be is a matter that can only be solved, upon one acknowledging the complementary relationship which exists between free will and determinism. Likewise, to stretch free will is to make a demigod out of man, while singling and fully clinging to determinism is to deny mankind his most basic right, the power to make a choice; and to helplessly and perpetually relegate mankind to fate. Conclusion One can therefore see properly that philosophy is a discipline and a cognitive science which permeates every aspect of being and livelihood. The fact that this discussion boils down to only two topics that have been discussed by Chaffe illustrates the prolific nature of philosophy. Likewise, the readiness of philosophy to show compatibility with other disciplines such as law, ethics, theology, and politics and government are clearly seen in the book Philosopher’s Way. It is upon reading Chaffe’s contribution that the reader gets acquainted with the essence, scope and relevance of philosophy. For the student of philosophy, the book is a comprehensive text book that will remain a constant companion and the most reliable source of reference. To those not pursuing philosophy, the book is an eye opener and an instructor to reason and feasible problem-solving skills and a shaper of a comprehensive worldview. Governments, regimes and cultures stand and fall on philosophies. It is not fortuitous that nearly all inventions were driven by the philosophical primaries of doubting and inquiring, and also not in vain that philosophers have always been in the company of world rulers and kings. Work Cited Chaffe, John. The Philosopher's Way: Thinking Critically about Profound Ideas. New York: Prentice Hall College, 2005. Read More