Moustafa Shamdeen Midterm Essay - Invisible Hand

Moustafa Shamdeen, Section 12, The Invisible Hand

The Invisible Hand is usually used in reference to Adam Smith's idea that an unseen force moves the free market, usually self-interest like supply and demand, but in this case, an unseen force moves 4 individuals together for an interesting conversation.

I'm not too sure how i ended up there, but I found myself in a massive marble plaza almost as if someone had guided me there and an image suddenly popped in my head, it was of Raphael's "The School of Athens." However it wasn't populated with the greats like the painting was, but instead housed 4 chairs and a semicircular table, 3 chairs on the curved half spaced evenly, and the last one on its lonesome on the flat side. There was classical music being played on speakers that couldn't be seen, at least to my eye, but it wasn't too loud, almost as if it was meant to be background noise for something to come. For some reason, I was drawn to the table in the middle, and sat in the lone chair on the flat side, in front of me a sheet of paper with two simple questions, we'll get to those later.

As soon as I get comfortable, in comes 3 men. They seem familiar but I can't place a name on any of them. One was dressed in a button up and jeans, so I labeled him "business casual" for ease, next to him a rather serious looking guy, in a suit and had thick dark rimmed glasses, I labeled him "serious glasses," and finally another man with glasses, who also had a suit, but had a lighter atmosphere, so he was just "glasses." They all took seats at the table.

Me: Hello, can I ask you all a question? Did you all feel like you were guided here today?

They all answered with slightly different versions of yes.

Glasses: It was a rather strange feeling, but for some reason I felt I had to come here.

Serious Glasses: I agree, there was something drawing me here today.

Business Casual: I agree, it reminded me of Adam Smith's "Invisible Hand" idea but instead of the market, I was moved.

Me: Well I guess we should introduce ourselves, I'm Moustafa Shamdeen, a Math major, nothing else is really going on in my life.

Julian Baggini(Business Casual): I'm Julian Baggini, people call me a philosopher and I've written a few books here and there.

Nigel Warburton(Glasses): My name is Nigel Warburton, I usually write books based on the basics of philosophy, like the most prominent figures in it, to help it spread.

Kurt Andersen(Serious Glasses): I’m Kurt Andersen, I’ve published a few books, had a radio program, and have a magazine called Spy, that’s really all.

Me: Now that that’s in order, great! I don’t exactly know what the “Invisible Hand” as Mr. Baggini put it, wants with us, but it seems like today I’m supposed to serve as a moderator for these two questions I have in front of me, and I guess you three are supposed to discuss It among yourselves. Why this cosmic force chose a Mathematics student who hasn’t even graduated yet is beyond me, but I’m not here to make them angry. So, I apologize if this is abrupt but let’s begin.

Me: Question one, do you think philosophy can help people learn to respect truth, facts, reality, and one another, and to reject falsehood, superstition, selfishness, polarization, partisanship, and mutual hostility based on differences of race, religion, ethnicity, nationality, belief, etc.? If so, how? If not, why not?

Nigel Warburton: If you don’t mind me going first, my short answer is yes, my long answer is that what you asked is essentially what I aim to do. My book “A Little History of Philosophy” is written to do exactly that, it gives a broad overview of the most prominent philosophers from ancient Greece to modern day, as a means to help the populace understand the ideas that the world works with, that the modern way of thinking isn’t one that we’ve always had, and hopefully it serves as a way to inform the public so they can inform themselves with these ideas. Philosophy in the old, was interconnected with math and science, so I think just by learning about it, it’s bound to help people respect facts and reality. Now in regard to race and religion and the such, that becomes a harder question to answer, because I think that still depends on the way that philosophy was passed down to them, if someone altered their world view enough there’s no telling how people may act, which is why I try and convey that information as unbiased as I can, by only giving the experiences that the philosophers had that helped them come to their conclusions. I think C.J. Peirce and William James’ philosophy that “Truth….is what we would end up with if we could run all the experiments and investigations we would ideally like to” (LH 166). But taking that a step further, what we believe is our truth, what gets us through the day is our truth, and philosophy can help get you there. I apologize for rambling, but my answer summarizes to yes. 

Me: I thought that was a very well thought out answer, and it’s my fault as a moderator if I don’t stop you if you go on too long, and I felt you stayed on topic just fine.

Julian Baggini: I mean if I could build off of what Mr. Warburton said, “Originality lies in interpretation” (HWT 18) This is an idea from Indian philosophy, because much of their modern philosophy is just reinterpreted older philosophy, but the key word there is reinterpreted. Philosophy doesn’t matter if it’s not applicable to you. So, to reinterpret these ideas to fit them into your life is exactly what you should be doing. Now I’m not saying that you should change the core of the philosophy itself, because some may argue that is just a new philosophy, though you can also do that, but you should fit philosophy to your life, to your truth, and use it to help you understand and accept the world around you.

Kurt Andersen: For me I think yes, philosophy is always questioning, as it should be because things change. "The scientific method is unceasingly skeptical, each truth understood as a partial, provisional best-we-can-do-the-moment understanding of reality" (FL 42). I think philosophy can help you find the truth, I think it can help you dissuade superstition and polarization and all of the others, AS LONG as you constantly revise it, and constantly change it, and constantly adapt it. The lifestyles of a person in Ancient Greece, 2500 years ago, to the lifestyles of a person in 16th century England, to the lifestyles of a person 50 years ago, to now are all widely different. Society held different views, different things were acceptable others were not, but if philosophy is supposed to lead you to that reality, then you have to change it constantly to FIT the reality. 

Me: Personally I agree with Mr. Baggini's and Mr. Andersen's views, I think respecting truth is what philosophy is all about. People dig down and look for the answers that maybe aren't surface level, and they cause you to think about the world differently, but as the world changes, how you think about it should also change. I think there's no real harm in being accepting of other peoples views, because at the end of the day, their life is effected by their views, not yours, so to enforce or coerce or reject other people because their beliefs, their philosophies, their way of life don't line up with yours, to me seems in short, stupid.

Me: Mr. Baggini, Mr. Andersen, those were both great answers, and I feel as if you could talk about this topic for days but for the sake of time, we should start moving onto the next question. What is your answer to William James’s “really vital question for us all: What is this world going to be? What is life eventually to make of itself?”

Kurt Andersen: I don't know if you mean in the literal biological sense I'm not exactly an expert in that field, but if I imagine you mean as as society, my book Fantasy Land is meant to describe exactly that. It's not an all too new idea, but the idea is that people will push away reality and deny facts, and be based on older beliefs, and keep this hopeful wishful thinking up, and it ends up hurting us. Don't get me wrong, being hopeful WITH cause is fine, but being hopeful without it, is a pipe dream essentially, you're delusional if you think that the world will follow your will just because it's what you want, and it's something we're seeing today, not for the first time, but just because its not the first time doesn't mean its not harmful. If another Chernobyl happens is someone going to say "Oh it happened before, there's no issue," no it'd be a world crisis, a huge issue that'd be in history forever. I did a live interview on this with the Aspen Institute maybe a few months before Fantasy Land was released if you want to check out, while a still surface level take, more in depth than I can get here. So I guess the crux of my answer is that at its current rate, nothing good.

Julian Baggini: While I can see what Mr. Andersen is saying, I feel that I see the question differently. I interpreted this more in the sense of how you see yourself, and I actually did a Ted Talk on this almost 9 years ago. Life is the sum of your parts. Well I spoke more on the fact that you are the sum of your experiences rather than you are at the center of your experiences, but there is no reason you can't expand that idea to life. What you life becomes is what you make it become, it's an amalgamation of everything you've ever done. And I suppose to the same extent, the world is going to be whatever you make the world.

Nigel Warburton: I think I share similar views to Mr. Baggini or maybe not now that I think about it, but you can decide that I suppose. I did an interview with a young gentleman named Filip Matous, I believe, maybe 10 years back, and he asked me the question what do I want to be remembered for, and I replied that's a strange way to live life, John Stuart Mill said that 'one of the best ways of being happy is being immersed in something else.' So as soon as you break that immersion, and you look back, you can't be happy anymore. I think we shouldn't be focused on what life will be eventually or what comes of life but instead on what we make of it now.

Me: This is kind of a cop out answer, but I don't really know. I think I agree with Mr.Andersen that if it goes on like this, it's not ideal, it's not the way I think most people want life to move towards, whether they know it or not, I think that this road is a rough one, and just because it's rough doesn't mean that the destination is going to be rewarding. So on one hand that's how I feel, but on the other, I agree with Mr. Warburton, that living in the now is much more important than thinking about the future. Now I'm not saying you should drink your heart out, but I'm not saying not to. You're your own being so the decisions you make should be your own, and if all you focus on is the future, then by the time you come back to the present, you won't have any time to move towards that future.

Me: Those were all phenomenal answers, and I mean that's it for the questions, interesting takes all around, definitely all thought provoking. It seems that the "Invisible Hand" is letting us go, so I guess we're free to leave. Pleasure meeting you all, until next time. 

And then all 4 of them parted ways, with a slightly new view on the same old world.