8 warriors and thrill seekers
From The Glass House Philosopher 6th December 2004:
On a hunch, over the weekend I did a search on Google for 'philosophy, warrior'. There were hundreds of links. Plenty references to 'warrior philosophy' and 'the philosophy of the warrior'. The same themes were repeated over and over again: mental and physical self-discipline, indifference to external circumstances, intense focus, self-control. The philosophical warrior is modest at all times, only revealing his or her formidable strength and skill at the appropriate opportunity. The causal onlooker would never know.
To the warrior, philosophy is a weapon.
Why does this make me recoil? The idea of 'being in control' grates. I don't think that the true philosopher is ever totally in control. Philosophy will not be contained in an ammunition box. It bursts out, holds your mind captive, leaves you struck dumb with awe.
I wouldn't like to predict how a 'true philosopher' would behave in a situation that demanded physical courage. There's the famous description of Socrates marching barefoot in winter during the Peloponnesian Campaign. But tubby, hen pecked Socrates could not be described as a 'philosophy warrior' by any stretch of the imagination.
For the thrill-seeker, philosophy is a drug.
I've gotten high on philosophy more than a few times. No drug will compete (and I tried one or two in my youth) with philosophy's roller-coaster ride.
But the true philosopher isn't in it just for the ride. The fact is, philosophy can be intensely boring and frustrating. In his Autobiography Bertrand Russell relates how he sat at his desk every morning for a year in front of an blank sheet of paper trying, and failing, to find a satisfactory solution to the problem which defeated the German mathematician Frege, the infuriating paradox of 'the class of all classes which are not members of themselves'. (Eventually, Russell discovered the 'Theory of Types', which as he himself admitted was more of a restrictive stipulation than a genuine solution.)
Too scary for the warrior, too frustrating for the thrill seeker, philosophy does not permit herself be owned or used.
Then why isn't this obvious?
I just gave the example of Bertrand Russell. There is a paradox there, and I'm not thinking of Russell's Paradox. It is almost impossible not to romanticise the picture Russell hunched over his piece of paper, scribbling away, or staring out of the window waiting for inspiration, or grimacing in pain as he tries to catch the elusive 'lost formula'. Wouldn't you like to be like him? Wouldn't it be more exciting than the life you have now?
Yes, but to be like Russell you have to be gripped by the problems that Russell was gripped by. Are you? can you imagine being gripped by the question whether the class of all classes which are not members of themselves is a member of itself or not?
There's more excuse for romaticising the philosophy warrior. There's the example of the great Bruce Lee — how romantic can you get? In the excellent film biography, there is one scene where Lee is working on his graduate philosophy dissertation on Hegel of all people. Imagine that. 'A dose of Hegel really helps me limber up' — as if!
There is an experience which I have been through a few times in response to a setback or adversity. I go into warrior mode. Or, rather, I imagine what it would be like to be the warrior who faces adversity with resourcefulness and courage. 'Imagine what Bruce Lee would do.'
No-one would think that this is anything but romantic fantasy. A story one tells oneself, a consoling myth.
The reality is that Lee is one of very few martial artists who had a genuinely wide-ranging interest in philosophy, both Eastern and Western, and not just so-called 'martial arts philosophy'. The great tradition of Eastern philosophy has been particularly badly served by modern-day philosophy warriors.
Then again, I've been witness to some comic scenes in Oxford academic philosophy seminar rooms, where professors high on intellectual vanity and testosterone tussled like angry bulls. — And they wonder why there are fewer female academic philosophers!
I am the last person to try to put people off from studying philosophy. But if you're in it for the wrong reasons, you're going to give up rather quickly. Take your time. Let philosophy get under your skin. Then perhaps you will learn to love philosophy as she deserves to be loved...
...for her own sake.