Baier - A Naturalist View of Persons Text

A Naturalist View of Persons Author(s): Annette Baier Source: Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association, Vol.
65, No. 3 (Nov., 1991), pp. 5-17 Published by: American Philosophical Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3130139 . Accessed: 13/05/2013 16:04
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
American Philosophical Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 130.216.162.35 on Mon, 13 May 2013 16:04:29 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
A NATURALIST VIEW OF PERSONS

Annette Baier of University Pittsburgh theEighty-Seventh AnnualEastern Division delivered Presidential Address before December in the American Boston, Massachusetts, of PhilosophicalAssociation Meeting 29, 1990. the to JohnKnox,in his FirstBlast of the Trumpet against According to it as of is to as well monstrous "contumely regiment women, "repugnant nature," of of to a to and the subversion woman God, good order," promote anyposition have not often realm. We in the Eastern Division of the APA in superiority any Our first order that John defended. subverted thepatriarchal Knoxso passionately Whiton Calkins waselected woman surprisingly early in 1918Mary gave president at Harvard, was"A Personalistic theeighteenth address presidential [1]andhertitle with hersin mind. After of Nature." I chosemytitle MaryCalkins, Conception was in 1941, andKatharine Gilbert Gracede Lagunawasthenext woman president, half old existence, we elected three in 1946. So inthefirst ofour90 year president havebeen onlytwo, there womanpresidents. In thesecondhalfof our existence in 1975, Lazerowitz and nowme. AliceAmbrose view of naturewas one that Mary Calkinstook it thata personalist of like the different natural all to somedegree interdependence emphasized things, the and I take a naturalist view of personssimilarly to emphasize ourselves, of Persons born to and learn the are earlier interdependencepersons. persons, [2] artsof personhood from arts other These include the self-consciousness persons. which from follows mutual thesortof representation that alongwith recognition, makes that the Calkins noted we as first speech possible.Mary persons recognize such are thosewho greetus, call to us, answer our calls. Our personhood is called into other treat us as one of full who them. responsive, expression by persons to communicate with other Theremaybe persons wholacktheability as persons, Calkins but our own easiest and most natural of believed, understanding Mary is of communicative has reminded us, [3] the persons persons.As AmelieRorty a theatrical rootsof theword"person," the mask which literally through speaking voiceemerges, makeexpressive voicethefirst essential ofpersons. The tradition inwhich Calkins inherpresidential was address, Mary spoke, the idealist one. Royce,and before himBerkeley, werethe philosophers whose themes shetookup. Ourownrecent discussions ofpersonhood owe moreto Locke thanto Berkeley or Royce. Lockemakesour answerability on judgment daythe central factaboutourpersonhood. On that "no one shall "Great Day,"he writes, be madeto answer forwhathe knows his doom,his of;butshallreceive nothing Conscience or excusing of him." Responseto accusations is the form accusing that Lockeemphasizes as essential to personhood, and theability to responsiveness
5
APA PROCEEDINGS, VOL. 65,NO. 3
"I don'trecollect excuseoneself becomes a keyabilitythat bysaying doingthat" must persons possess. Our modern discussions of personal on have put moreweight identity Lockeanindividual than on role and We have taken social memory answerability. theindividualist from atoms. In the Lockeand treated as moral emphasis persons Kantian tradition, where a person'smoral answerability is emphasized, this individualism remains central. The atoms havetohavean eyeon themolecules they areobliged tojoin,butitis interms notactual, communities ofidealandimaginary, that is taken to define their duties.Individual andnotcollective they responsibility definepersonhood, and the separateness of personsbecomesa and autonomy treasured doctrine. a voiceofherown, Nowofcourse eachwith youandI areseparate persons, and a will of her own. Does thatfactdistinguish or us from cats or gorillas A current a roach "Their T.V. advertisement for killer has someone dolphins? say, sortdeserve to die." We do notbother with inourforensic individual responsibility waron. But with is we and make roaches and their sins. It their sort dealings punish to when we makeanykind ofwar, we arevery from individual to switch then, ready collective It "their sort" deserve to whenever becomes who die, always responsibility. our fighting bloodis up on behalf of us against Christians Moslems, them, against it humans comesto roaches. And when communists, against capitalists against collective of we are some ourselves to questions reparation, willing accept We at to collective are switches from individual responsibility. adept quick not when is the calmer our reason battle but in cries, responsibility, just by deranged ofwars, aftermath andinsuchcool theological hours as thoseinwhich thedoctrine of original sinwas conceived.Our philosophical to be as muchon focusought collective as as on individual we ourselves when seek to understand responsibility, We should be as for the concerned with our for, example, persons. responsibility oftheplanet, of a country more andwith as a resident myresponsibility despoiling for not than most for thegreenhouse as with soleresponsibility effect, responsible my in the to theneighborhood taking myrecyclable garbage recycling plants.Included fullinquiry intowhatwedo and havedoneto us,as distinct from whatI alonedo and havedoneto me,will I actor am acteduponas be those caseswhere frequent one ofcertain ofwhich as an informal I amtaken to serve class, My representative. ownnomination is not, andelection to theoffice ofpresident, I believe, for example, due to anysingle-handed andis almost achievements or individual services ofmine, notindependent ofthefact that I ama woman.Anyofa fair-sized certainly group of other women and witha of or nearmyphilosophical philosophers generation, similar sortof record, couldeasily havestoodheretoday. [4] Locke'sdiscussion of ofpersonal ourmodern launched discussions identity ofpersonhood as a moral andoftheidentity ofcontinuants. answerability, concept, For all hisdismissal of theoldernotion thateachof us is a uniqueimmortal soul, createdby and answerable to a father-god, he keeps muchof the theological and framework inplacewhile us from immortal soulsintoresponsible transforming with futures and remembered pasts.[5] possibly transmigrating persons anticipated Like The last setshisframe ofdiscussion, as itdidthat ofthetheologians. judgment
PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESSES
also matter, to lastbutalsoto first Fororigins he looksnotonly since them, things. havetwobeginnings of existence". "one thing cannot a beginning to Locke,do we find of a newperson? Not, When, according or birth it seems,at the conception of a childto two parentpersons, jointly ofthe In carefully theidentity forsucha newbeginning. distinguishing responsible that bothfrom thatof "theMan" andfrom ofanysoulsubstance enabling person a man to do his thinking soulful thatif "same and other Locke writes activities, soul"made"sameman," then wewould immaterial haveto allowforthepossibility thatthesamemancouldbe "born ofdifferent andin distant women times."It will be not qua man,but rather as in Locke's thatSocrates, qua soul or qua person, be borntwice, onceinAthens andoncein Queenborough. Birth is might example, as a man, hisorigin butnotas soulor as person.Qua person, he has no mother or or perhaps an accidental howLocke ones. (It is interesting mother, exchangeable takesit forgranted thatthemeaning of "samewoman" and "different women" is fixed and to do in order his niche, clearly by biological thought genealogical on what"sameman"should be taken to imply. it seems, are Women, experiments to keep their while male their biological places, persons plan biology-transcending timetravels.)Lockein thesethoughts aboutthinking is in effect persons agreeing withDescartes, who in the Third thathis humanparents, Meditation declared MadameandMonsieur Descartes "arenotinanysenseauthors ofmy senior, being, in as faras I am a thinking the A on other hand,takesit as thing." naturalist, a person obvious that is,as Montaigne putit,"marvellously corporeal," [6] andthat a person's to is think affected from and inheritance ability bygenetic parents isvitally sort the care of received in for childhood, examplein being dependent upon introduced into a language So naturalists see personsas having community. and who for cared them. Locke is splendidly person-progenitors person-parents awareof theimportance of howwe are helpedto learnto speak, butit at bestis unclearwhether Lockeanpersonshave person-progenitors or can have person as distinct from and human humanprogenitors progeny progeny.Do Kantian have At anyrateit seemsclearthat,in this later, persons, person-progenitors? do not need mothers. As a contemporary tradition, persons philosopher putsit, "Whatis important aboutus is that we arepersons.One's dignity does notdepend evento theextent ofbeing bornof woman, or bornat all." uponone's parentage, And now we have got to thatvitalKantianconceptual linkbetween anddignity. To be a person is notto be born ofwoman, norindeedto personhood be bornat all,butto spring forth from somefertile fieldof Aresfully noumenal formed and upright. Somephilosophers likeLockeandKant,distinguish our who, fromour living humanpresence, are willing to say quite straightpersonhood that whoso obviously are lively and do haveparents, andwhose infants, forwardly
[7]
is not immediately obvious,are not yet persons.[8] "Person" is alwaysa dignity statusterm;by thesephilosophers it is reserved forthoseat least trying out a dignified gait or mien. It is not our ability to tease and play (an ability which infants our would-becommanding stature, displaybetterthanmostadults),but our upright that are decreed by the foundingand presence, our pretensionsto importance, of persons to be the qualificationsfor sustainingmembers of the fraternity
APA PROCEEDINGS, VOL. 65, NO. 3
if theyare men,matter, and theydecree who and Persons,especially membership. what matters. "We are beings to whom thingsmatter,"they self-importantly who of coursedid fairly the beliefthat straightforwardly proclaim. Aristotle, profess but a still had accidental mothers essential launched fathers, flourishing persons [9] tradition of finding moral significance in our upright posture (ours, that is, after and beforethe decrepitude of old age). [10] We are the descendantsof infancy, homo erectus, we are told by our wise men,the anthropologists. (Could it be that men have a thingabout uprightness?)A recentmale writer, who stressesthat "to be a personis to existin a space defined of worth," bydistinctions [11] and who sees us as special in our divine knowledgeof "hypergoods" and hyper evils, finds is He writes, "Our dignity in our peculiarmode of strutting. symbolic significance of movement how so muchwovenintoour very ... our style comportment expresses we see ourselvesas enjoying it or failing to do it,as commanding respector lacking so." [12] Not our clever and expressive hands,nor our capacityfor laughingat but let alone our variations on the eyebrow flashand the shouldershrug, strutters, our upright stance,and our spectator-conscious heaven-gazing respect-demanding of persons. They lie walk. Kantian persons cannot boast of being no respecters to be respectersof under solemn obligationto be just that, and in particular, themselves as persons. Naturalistically-minded philosophers such as David Hume, [13] and naturalists such as Charles Darwin,have gentlyreminded inclined philosophically and to uprightness these dignity and aspirants fetishists thatbirdstoo are two-footed can strutand look aloftbeforetheysoar aloft,and thatgorillascan be imposingly Here is Hume on "the prideof animals": "The veryportor gait of self-important. a swan,or a turkey, of himself, or a peacock,showsthe highidea he has entertain'd and his contemptof all others. This is the more remarkablethat the pride is discov'd in the male only." (T. 326) Hume's word "pride" is itselfcalculated to of those dignity-preservers had declared humblethe pretensions who paradoxically to a to be be sin. For the had to oneself in tradition one believe pride theological one of a special breed,who, in Descartes'wordsat the end of the FifthPart of his Discourse on theMethod,have "more to fearand hope forthan fliesand ants,"or forthat matter than apes or dolphins. We mustbelieveourselvesspecial precisely in the prospectof comingbeforea divine seat,whereeach willanswerfor judgment her deeds and misdeeds. We are the chosen ones, chosen,in virtueof our group forindividual Our kinddeserve in humankind, membership precisely responsibility. to be judged and sentencedone by one. Mass extermination is for lesser breeds. But our cosmic privilege is supposed to make us quake as much as it makes us We are to bow our necks,and bend our upright swagger. proud stiff carriageinto a kneelingsuppliant'spose. To be a person is to be one of the chosen people, chosen for individual individual conscience. guilt, This theologicaland Kantianversionof whatwe are is a remarkableand bit of self-portrayal, a place in the best ethnographic museums, revealing deserving with other and fetishes.The capacityforself-portrayal head-dresses, masks, along is of course itselfone of the marksof personhood that the continuersof this have singled out for emphasis. theological tradition,as well as the naturalists, and with and self-representation Conscience, self-consciousness, appear together,
them so that theself-representers haveintruthfulness to represent comesreflexivity, as self-representers, havetopaint themselves themselves intheactofpainting themselves. We mustnot merely see ourselves in the mirror but mustsee ourselves catchour own self-important in the very lookingat ourselves, self-inspection narcissistic act itself.Nor is thisall: we haveto catchalso our ownshameat this We arefurtive ouradmiring at narcissists, very self-preoccupation. stealing glances ourselves from lowered to pay narcissists, eyes-sometimes self-flagellating willing in self-condemnation forourguilty self-satisfactions. As Hume wroteof the typical manifestation of such unhappy religious human these arethe aresick men's dreams. self-consciousness, surely [14] Yet they dreams that ofus chooseto continue, as we nourish andKantian theLockean many notion that to be a person is altogether to transcend to enter into nature, biological some supernatural realmwherewe are no longer essentially relatedto and on others, we choosesuchrelationships. unless we are In thatrelation dependent no longer onesbornto others, with a placein a sequence ofmortal but generations, rather autonomous each of the the egos, responsible possessed separately dignity, "unconditional of one destined to own stand alone before his worth", incomparable that us ofthedivine within conscience, seat,"as Kantputs "representative judgment it.[15] Kant explicitly likens the "court of conscience" to an ordinary law court, with and of a juryof mention advocate, accused, judge (no complete prosecutor, And of the in all indeed its does take several one's peers). variants, game judging, In its core courtroom someone must while others form, players. playjudge, play and accused. The roleof jury-cum-judge, in thetheological advocate, prosecutor, beenreserved has officially for a patriarchal God. Butthere hasbeenno tradition, of human of meneagerto showtheir to draw stand-ins, shortage god-like ability ofworth, distinctions to separate thegoodpersons from thenobler theevilpersons, from thelessnoblesex,and thehigher thelower from values. Our self-portrayals, itcomesto acknowledging when ourcapacity for and accusing, finding guilty, judging beenlessthan haveoften self-conscious. We havetended toproject sentencing, fully our capacity forcondemnation ontoourgods,evenmorethanwe haveprojected other ofourpersonhood. We makeunfavorable andwe act ingredients judgments, on them, butwe also liketo soothe ourselves "notmy butthine, be will, byintoning, done." We evadeanswerability forpassing We like to think that some judgment. bothassigns theresponsibilities andjudgeshowwellthey havebeen superperson and that we these authoritative on from discharged, merely pass along judgments But as we all it is we are who for and know, high. collectively responsible allocating we whodivide thelaborand decideifthelaborer is or reallocating responsibilities, is notworthy of herhire, we whoappoint thejudges. It is nowan old oft-told talethat our religious showus a lot propensities aboutourselves. To see that we see ourselves as madein a divine madein image, theimageof a judgmental is to see about our self-imaging god, something special both ourstrengths andourweaknesses. As Xenophanes proclivities, remarked, wisely ifhorseshad religious inclinations their godwouldbe a horse. [16] Our God is a and self-imaging is undeniable aboutus jealous,monopoly-claiming God,andwhat who haveconceived of sucha God is our arrogance, ourneed to see ourselves as
10
a lion,a tyger, a cat their fighting; paws,an ox his horns;a dog his teeth,a horse his avoid harming their eventho' theyhave nothing heels; yettheycarefully companion, to fear fromhis resentment." (T. 398) Pretendaggressionis one of the arts of personhood,and one we sharewith"almostall animals". What do we use, in play and in fighting? Primarily our wits, by which we inventgunpowderand plan
of multiple our tastefor Thiscombines with special[17] and as worthy portraits. and distanced for thatneed disguised self-representation, pictures puzzleportraits, somedecoding before Our as what are,self-representations. they appear they really tastefor disguised with a more taste for self-representation general goes along and with a We each learn fascination with stories about disguises, metamorphosis. to fita variety of rolesand becomeadeptat quickswitches of guiseand disguise. We each really do cometo contain ceremonies and all the multitudes. Religious that with them cater to But this taste. more fundamentaldressing up goes obviously doctrine of a god in human our fascination with ly,thevery guiseitself expresses and be To a person, we couldsay,is to be one aptforimpersonguises disguises. one to be impersonated and one to impersonate or otheraspects of others ation, oneself. [18] The alternative to thistheological is a naturalist viewof self-mystification like Hume's or Darwin'sor Freud's,thattakes our biological nature persons, takesit not as a handicap but as the sourceof strengths as well as seriously, weaknesses.In virtue of our longand helpless who all beginas infancy, persons, smallpersons, are necessarily socialbeings, whofirst learnfrom olderpersons, by The naturalist knows that play, byimitation, bycorrection. prideand shameare as oftendirected at parentage, or at inherited wealthor home,and schooling, inheritable as at individual of vice. A will will or naturalist diseases, strength solitary view we in the full of what as our She will attend to our claim own. keep range for as well of of our own as capacity representation origins, (andmisrepresentation) of us. else interest to She will our taste take account of for everything pomp(and for at pomp),ourdelight in guises and disguises. jeering For a naturalist viewof persons, the our religious propensities present naturalist must aim to them better than The understand the challenge. greatest of naturalism to explainthe can,just as the opponent attempts supernaturalist of with his in naturalism. consistency tempting appeal [19] Hume, perfect took the human of to be the that naturalism, phenomenon religion toughest problem hisphilosophy A and one thatremained "a riddle, an aenigma." naturalist faced, viewofpersons should relate ofpersonhood to itsother religious displays, displays and Humein factdida lotto leavethesedisplays lessofan "inexplicable mystery" thanthey of religious otherwise haveappeared. The "playsome whimsies" might ceremonies are notso very after our other different, whimsies, all,from playsome suchas graduation addresses. ceremonies, or,forthat matter, presidential Our capacity forplayis,as Hume,Nietzsche, and others haverecognized, an important of theskills ofpersonhood. Humetookthiscapacity to be member continuous with that all and to show in our case found in thehigher animals itself of our in ourtruth-seeking as most as much in backgammon and chess. In games, an Hume writes: countsas winning, as defeating opponent. games,something "Almost all animals use inplaythesamemember, andnearly thesameaction, as in
11
we con ourcompetitors and ourpersuasive intoa false powers, bywhich strategies, ourenemies intoamassing their on a different senseof security, forces border than is ourflexible theonewewillattack. Ourspecial inanystruggle for survival weapon with ourglib andourequally flexible andarticulate moral intelligence, tongues along sense. (Descartes, all agree on this.)We areadeptat dealsand HumeandDarwin at doubledealing, at promising and at suspecting at judging and at promises, lying to find all whimsical of then, judges. We willexpect, denouncing play-displays our intellectual, verbal, and moral skills, especiallyin their aggressiveand cater toourtaste for suchdangerous aggression-dependent guises.Religions games, andthecaretaken to avoidharming theplayers canbecome as the small, vanishingly boundaries between whatis play, or rehearsal, andwhat is forrealgetblurred. The naturalist will we our not that will lose tastes for philosophical expect dangerous fordrawing them.Shewillnotexpect boundaries, them, games, crossing redrawing as it has commonly beenfound intheworld, or inphilosophy, to depart in religion but she that can we what we cannot cure. peace, mayhope palliate She might indeedhope that whosespecialboastis superior philosophers, will become a little more embarrassed than seemtobe when self-consciousness, they their owngames areblatantly imitative ofpatriarchal inboththeir aggressive games, their and versions. it seems this from address that We,and religious not-so-religious I haveto meanwe,seemfairly content tomake ourphilosophical discussions warby verbal means. Like religious ourphilosophical often confrontations, engagements are a not-so-moral of war. Many of us knowingly equivalent try,in moral to convert intoitsmost a superstrategy warlike for philosophy, morality equivalent, andthen defend ourtheories attack on their rivals. winning, bypreemptive [20] And inourmore discussions ofpersonhood wehaverecently ingames peaceable engaged of metamorphosis thatrival themost whimsies of thereligious-not playsome just Socratesinto the mayor of Queenborough, and Heliogabalus into his hog,but male philosophers into Greta Garbo [21] and othermarvels of contemporary transfiguration. [22] Humewrote that errors inreligion aredangerous, errors inphilosophy only ridiculous. It is true, no one is likely to go to warto defend therealpresence of Socrates in themayor of Queenborough, or of Garboin one or several of us. At worst we becomelaughing andthat neednotbe a dishonorable stocks, post. To a naturalist, a striking feature ofthese recent neo-Lockean philosophical fantasies is thewaythey intoone person's life thesort displace, continuing history, of treeor vinestructure thathas traditionally been used to represent a family's overmany Simultaneous withthe denialthata person, history generations. qua need be born at a need be of the all, member, person, family goesan assimilation structure of a family's intoa single fantasies history person's history. Philosophical of"fusion" and "fission", ifthey owesomething to thenuclear owe power industry, moreto thetraditional ofthewaytwofamilies and representation join bymarriage new branchesare started when thereare severalchildren of the marriage. itseems, hasbeeninternalized, andeachperson becomes hisownfamily Genealogy, withmultiple So liberated continuers. are thesephilosophically tree,complete conceived from mere thatin thisfairyland malepersons persons biology maylose their Y chromosome, newpersons comeintobeing from a may byparthenogenesis
12
and evendeathgetsdiluted intomere weakened Persons, continuity. man-person, in her on thisversion neednotbe bornand neednotdie. MaryCalkins of them, "a words it would take a in Leibniz's address said that self, presidential very sleepy the like and to think of itself, one, priest momentary unremembering unrecognizing" of days neither without as "without mother, father, Melchisedec, having beginning it is thevery vol.28,p. 131). Paradoxically, norend of life"(Philosophical Review, will to identify self that promptsthese oneself as a lastingremembering modern if not of doing and death-transcending whimsies, generation-forgetting one's own not of without at least for if ofswitching immortal, Garbo's, being parents, "selves".It is Locke's endless series at leastofbecoming a potentially ofsuccessive to thatis thought intopsychological connectedness, criterion, memory generalized to be recalled, actual license theseignorings of actual origins, biological paststhere across wander as persons and to encourage thesefantasized freely transfigurations, on to memory andfrom togender. Forstrictly, thegenepool,from gender memory Locke'scriterion, a person is one whowasbornonlyifhe remembers beingborn, The autonomous that was dependent on others ifhe remembers only dependency. he was a heteronomous in that adolescent if he has succeeded forgetting person, of freedom as really his. Thesefantasies can rightly disown thatchildhood child, actualbiological actualmortality, from our ownactualhistory, actualdependency, and haveon thewhole beenmalefantasies, limitations anddeterminate possibilities, Wolf them Susan women have found sensibly says: strange. many philosophers [23] to do with never in persons had much forbeing interested mybeliefs "myreasons "reduction" a metaphysical abouttheir composition." metaphysical [24] Accepting or need ofconscious ofpersons intoa sequence not,sheclaims, experiences doings ofpersons of inany alter our aspects way conception more-central-than-metaphysical we with and as we areconcerned them.On a generous as we viewthem construal, It is to disown itself. as theY chromosome see thesemalefantasies trying might been allocatedthe care of very thatwomen,who have traditionally unlikely willtakepersons as anything andold persons, interdepenexcept dependent young thatnewpersons that women can pretend dentpersons. [25] It is justas unlikely after a conception bornofwomen, comeintobeing in anyother waythan bybeing from inallcasesexcept those arejointly for which twopersons resulting responsible, of the non-culpably the seduction ignorant.The factsof shared rape or from ofresponsibililessthan shared burdens andofthefrequently equally responsibility, It is notmerely itso easyto forget. women find that arenotfacts aboutpersons ty, to such itis navels are essential too that norevenopposedthumbs, stature, upright to sayabout hashadlittle of. Metaphysics, so far, as wehaveany persons knowledge navels. intheneo-Lockean do participate women Nowofcourse philosophers many have andthere Kantians arewomen thought justas there experiments, metaphysical Women's of patriarchal adherents been eagerwomen reputation religions. always ithasbeenourbestsurvival andoften fordocility is notentirely unearned, strategy. itsbackofmind and oftheperson, ofmodern philosophy [26] The schizophrenia ofgenerations to ourplacein a sequence handed to ourmammalian tribute nature, not just is our joint responsibility, human of living, and dying persons, mating or anyfew or Kant's, Locke's, doing.Whatcanwe nowdo aboutit? The persons'
13
we become aware of thewide rangeof capacitiesthatgo intoour personhood. We can then see our intelligence ("MistressClever,the cleverwhore" as Luthercalled in relation to the of other smartanimals,our communicative and it) intelligence in to our in the context of our expressive powers relationship theirs, linguistic powers otherpowersof expression and representation, and so on forall our multiple arts
andit is ourterm. term is a status term, "person" [27] It iswe whohaveto decide to whatthatstatus is and whether we giveit a human to otheranimals, to fetus, we reserve whether itforthose, whoreally likecorporations, do have corporations; who dreamof non-biological origins, alongwiththose"honorary corporations" Sometimes we couldjust drop one wishes anyactualbiological forgetting origins. the term, so heavily is it withits theological freighted past and withcurrent controversies. Butwords arehardto kill.The only realistic is to makedo strategy withthe old concept, burdened it is. Like Hume,we can tryto heavily though and levelall itselitist to see our intelligence as one rethink, debunk, implications, of "reasonin animals," our muchvaunted as amongmanyforms dignity just a variant of thepeacock's or what Teichman demoted to "the pride Jenny recently rooster our as one form of animal factor," games just interesting [28] play.Mary Calkins' rather extreme was that we personify restriction and call without proposal of our own or whether "a person"every environment, perceptible part living would We to then on the from the nonliving. go distinguish communicating be one wayto defang the personsaroundus. Hers might non-communicating of or at least to it let if in our concept person, playharmlessly, uselessly, language. Or we couldletitbe a purely an attribute ofpronouns. grammatical category, The more refined ofpersonhood arts arelearned as thepersonal pronouns are learned, fromthe men and women, and girls boys,who are the learners' andplay-mates. We cometo recognize ourselves andothers in mirrors, companions to refer to ourselves and to others. We learnto draw, and to drawourselves to talk, and to talkabouttalk, to criticize, andto criticize toput criticisms, drawing, on dignified airsandto laugh at those whoputon dignified airs. We listen to fairy talesaboutprinces whobecomefrogs, whobecomeprincesses. Cinderellas When with ourparents, we havefantasies ofhaving beenstolen from displeased bygypsies nobler orwealthier ormore ofturning outtobe members ofsome indulgent parents, otherfamily, of really and princesses.And some of us become beingprinces and transpose all these talesintonewversions oftransformation, philosophers fairy newmetaphysical new or denials distortions our actualorigins. of metamorphoses, Some of us haveinvented a specialfallacy, theso-called to license genetic fallacy, toignore ourselves actual or treat them as irrelevant to current and origins capacities current debts.Someofus eventry to effect "total alterations" inphilosophy, to turn it from of theology, or a compensation forthelossof theology, beingan offshoot intosomething more more continuous with the rest ofourreallife.And naturalistic, others ofus,resigned to theunlikelihood oftotal at leastto develop alterations, try alternative to those the and unwitting self-understandings proposedby witting of thetheological continuers tradition. We naturalists see persons as intelligent, mammals who talkative, playful havebecomeconscious ofourselves, ofourmammalian its and nature, possibilities theconstraints itimposes. As webecome conscious ofouractual and origins history,
14
sometimes of personhood. We will be aware in particular that cooperation, our mammalian been the of the has saving strength cooperation against grain, a fuller ofourselves as persons andso wewillrealize that for species, understanding to cooperate, notonly likeandunlike minded we must continue with philosophers, context. intheir whostudy human butwith those inother natural persons disciplines in Our shows other Our natural as is habitat, persons, among personhood persons. to earlier and later are to one thewaywe other, generations, responsive responsive histories with ofpersons, tothepresence ofother groups differing groups responsive a shared is different and interestingly taste, Self-understanding self-understandings. formutual and cultivating itcallsforourfull response. capacities Endnotes In 1895shehad that this waswhere shespokeas president. [1] It is ironic a been refuseda Ph.D. by Harvard, by Hugo special petition signed despite become be to her to allowed in vain for had earlier petitioned Munsterberg, (who William G.H. Josiah an official doctoral James, Palmer, George Royce, candidate), at an to herperformance inglowing terms andPaul H. Harris, testifying Santayana had after she had andunofficial examination" "informal her, (unofficially) they given to giveany is notprepared other "TheHarvard satisfied Corporation requirements. In circumstances." the no how to matter Harvard exceptional degree anywoman, was women she to was when Radcliffe 1902, begged degrees, College permitted grant shewas,she woman that conferred. tohavea Ph.D.retrospectively proud Splendidly The Rise of American comes fromBruce Kuklick, refused. My information ofMary and Otto "The Strunk, Self-Psychology 4, Philosophy (Yale, 1977)Appendix Sciences 8 the Behavioral Journal Whiton Calkins," History of ofthe (1972) pp. 196203. in wrote in 1930, a psychologist as wellas a philosopher, Calkins, [2] Mary her last yearof life:"Witheach yearof life,witheach book read,witheach should I ammore convinced that I initiate orconfirm, observation psychology deeply to its environment, of the selfor person, as related be conceived as the science in Autobiography A History and social." C. Murchison, of Psychology physical in "Mary Edna vol. Heidbreder, 1, 41-42, Mass., by quoted pp. (Worcester, 1930) 8 Sciences Journal Calkins: A Discussion," Whiton oftheBehavioral oftheHistory 56-68. pp. (1972) Identities inThe "A Literary ofPersons (University Postscript," [3] A. Rorty, of California Press, 1976),p. 309. whohavebeen to be of all of us olderwomen [4] I taketherecognition inwaysthat sometimes in ourownways, inthephilosophical dialectic participating we However intersubstitutable voicesintothatconversation. introduce distinctive on someplatforms to be, forsomepeople, (and I have,in maybe, and be willing withanother on mywayto or from times been confused, several fact, platforms, we eachofcourse havea voiceof ourown, woman ofmygeneration), philosopher to a in response and I speak in merely myownvoicein whatI say heretoday, the which takes me I do take to be of that not individually (a recognition recognition of instant the usual to without of allowed form being expectation speak interesting
15
or audience).No one elseis answerable rebuttal with mefor what bycommentator I say,and it is doubtless theworseforthat. It is however, the better forsome from Jennifer helpful suggestions Whiting. toMartha and Bolton's paper"Lockeon Identity: Simple [5] I amindebted readto thePacific Division of theAmerican Compounded Things," Philosophical March 1989,for awareness of the seventeenth Association, century theological aboutwhat debates thesouldidwhile theresurrection ofthedead,debates awaiting in our identity as souls,persons, thatled to Locke'sinterest human living beings. in a volume, The paperis forthcoming Gracia edited and Kenneth Barber, byJorge on identity and individuation in theearly modern period. de Montaigne, in The III, viii. Charles Essays Taylor quotesthis [6] Michel Sources the 181. Press, of Self, University p. (Harvard 1990), inA. Rorty, "Conditions ofPersonhood," TheIdentities [7] DanielDennett, 176. ofPersons, op. cit., p. On theGeneration itwould Books 1-3. Perhaps ofAnimals, [9] Aristotle, be fairer to saythat Aristotle believes and that malepersons haveessential fathers accidental mothers. The interpretation roleof ofhisclaims abouttheform-giving thefather inprocreation is a vexed It is discussed matter. in Freeland, byCynthia "Aristotle on Bodies,Matterand Potentiality" in Allan Gotthelf and JamesG. IssuesinAristotle's Lennox, ed.,Philosophical Press, Biology University (Cambridge inAristotle's of 1987) andJohn Cooperin "Metaphysics Proceedings Embryology," theCambridge no. 214,pp. 14-41 how, Society, Philological (1988). Cooperexplains conviction calls thatonly whatCooperfelicitously despiteAristotle's unwavering semen" form theessential oftheoffspring, "honest-to-god (p. 16) candetermine they nevertheless sometimes inherit themother and herancestors.It is a traits from failure of thefather's active formative semento imposehisownor his ancestors' male form due to failure insufficient on theinert heat,Aristotle (a hypothesizes) femalefluidthatleads to its giving as it and the were, up, imposing opposite indeedthe specific version of it thatthe mother (female)form, (and her fluid) exhibit. (Generation This makes the mother not quite of Animals, 768a24-6) since she is who select what sort of female accidental, may particular (second-best) the semenforms. Aristotle some difficulty in has, one wouldthink, offspring for male of inheritance the form from mother, accounting any offspring's (nonsexual) but Cooper believes not merely thathe has the seeds of an explanation of the undeniable facts of the inheritance of of sexes traits both empirically byoffspring from of both his thesis that the male fluid in seminal sexes, contains, parents by all the movements of the of seminal fluid female with the whom potentiality, any malemight so canimpose offorms ofoffspring, butalso ofa vastarray copulate, any that"there is nothing or extravagant outlandish hereat all,onceAristotle's idea is and understood" is There no to it the female limit, seems, fully properly (p. 22). forms thathonest-to-god semencan impose, once it despairs itsown of imposing form. god-like Parts andOldAge,468, 653a,658a,andOn Youth ofAnimals, [10] Aristotle, 494. I am grateful to JohnCooper forinstruction in this ofAnimals, History Aristotelian lore.
[8]Ibid.
16
Introduction to Philosophy and theHumanSciences, Taylor, [11] Charles Vol. II (Cambridge Press, Philosophical Papers, University 1985). TheSources oftheSelf, Taylor, [12] Charles p. 15. whois a refreshingly minded philosonaturalistically [13] AllanGibbard, the observes that we a as manner attempted deterrent against pher, adopt dignified notmerely ofhuman butalsoofstray Choices, Apt importunings beggars dogs. Wise Press, Feelings (Harvard University p. 267. 1990), Natural Press, History ofReligion, University [14] DavidHume, (Stanford section. 1957),final on Ethics & Row,1963)lecture on Lectures Kant, [15] Immanuel (Harper conscience. inBeastandMan: TheRoots ofHumanNature Midgley, [16] Mary (Cornell the adds that 160, Press, University wisely anyspeciescapableof raising 1978),p. itself of who is on the of an ladder will question "top" evolutionary naturally put there. in our that eventhis that we are distinctive observes claim, [17] Nietzsche is itself a of He in forest the ant the imagines vanity, piece vanity. writes, "perhaps it as thegoal and objective of theforest All Too Human,PartII, ..." . (Human, Section14,"Man,thecomedian oftheworld.") The doctrine of the ourfascination with too,expresses Trinity, puzzle [18] casesof reidentification. andthe HumanSciences: Philosophical Philosophy Taylor, [19] See Charles 2 6. Press, Papers, (Cambridge University p. 1985), Warren in "Feminist Directions in MedicalEthics," Hypatia [20] Virginia to thisstyleof moral 4 (Summer, 1989,pp. 73-87),footnote 5, p. 86, refers as "The Gladiator ofTruth." Theory philosophy Reasons andPersons, Press,1984), p. University (Oxford [21] DerekParfit, 237. who are restrained some neo-Lockeans by [22] There are; however, David Wiggins, Samenessand Substance biologicalrealism. See in particular Press, 1980), Ch. 6, "Locke, Butler,and the Streamof (HarvardUniversity in A. Rorty Consciousness: And Men as Natural Kind," ofPersons, (ed.),Identities pp. 139-174. inMemory, hasa refreshingly brisk London, Warnock, 1987, way [23] Mary "We mayindeed withpuzzles about who would be who aftera brainswitch: ourselves be muddled aboutwhowe are,and whatourpastshavebeen. But the labels theatre anddoctors will notbe muddled. We shallhaveouroperating nurses and that willbe that." round ourwrists, (p. 71). Ethics96 (July, and Interest in Selves," "SelfInterest [24] Susan Wolf, 1986),p. 705. Review in"Branching Self-Consciousness," Philosophical [25] CarolRovane, includes (July, 1990), pp. 355-396,arguesthatfor personswhose life history thatwe find self-consciousness to have the sortof forward-looking branching of the must to haveadvance to personhood, be supposed essential knowledge they that reliable ofbranching, realpossibility knowledge persons justas wehave"highly haveanything intention do notbranch" couldtheir formation (p. 376). Onlythen
17
Enquiry,The New York TimesBook Review,August 12,1990,p. 14. This review
to thecoherence that ourscan have, ourreliable of approximating given knowledge theconstraints within which we shapeourlives.Thisreliable that knowledge agents must ofwhether or notpersons is empirical. intheir world do branch, Rovane have, that our writes confidence that inourworld do notbranch is basedon such persons facts as that"no one else in theworld remembers ourpastexperiences in theway we do" (pp. 376-7). Rovanedoes notstress but such reliable this, highly empirical mustbe interpersonal. We dependon otherpersonsfor it. knowledge surely wouldsimilarly and Branching persons depend uponthebrain-duplicating persons, their fortheknowledge would inorder to planfortheir need, futures, they patients, to see their livesas able to amount to somesortof whole. So bothactualnonandfantasized in branching persons, branching persons, depend uponother persons world their forwhatRovaneregards as minimally coherent self-consciousness. didthephilosophy that menhadinitially instructed me meekly [26] I myself to do, and rewarded me fordoing, I safely had tenure.Subversion until under the coverof apparent is also a fairly female one thatI tried out tactic, docility popular occasionally. our language with to makeit, and us, seem special." [27] "We connive Donald Davidson, "Rational andEvents, ed. Ernest Actions LePore and Animals," BrianP. McLaughlin, 473. (Blackwell, 1985)p. review ofAlasdair Three Versions Teichman, ofMoral [28] Jenny MacIntyre, elicited thepredictable in a letter of a malereader, to theeditor protest published 1. September

Baier - A Naturalist View of Persons Text

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Baier - A Naturalist View of Persons Text

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

A Naturalist View of Persons Author(s): Annette Baier Source: Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association, Vol.

A NATURALIST VIEW OF PERSONS

APA PROCEEDINGS, VOL. 65,NO. 3

APA PROCEEDINGS, VOL. 65, NO. 3

APA PROCEEDINGS, VOL. 65,NO. 3

APA PROCEEDINGS, VOL. 65,NO. 3

APA PROCEEDINGS, VOL. 65,NO. 3

APA PROCEEDINGS, VOL. 65,NO. 3

Enquiry,The New York TimesBook Review,August 12,1990,p. 14. This review

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen