• Home
  • About us
  • Contact Us
  • Date/Time
  • Login
  • Subscribe

logo

  • Home
  • Politics
  • Economics & Finance
  • World
  • Arts & Books
  • Life
  • Science
  • Philosophy
  • Subscribe
  • Events
Home
  • Home
  • Blogs
  • Politics
  • Economics & Finance
  • World
  • Arts & Books
  • Life
  • Science
  • Philosophy
  • Subscribe
  • Events
  • Home
  • Blogs
  • Jonathan Derbyshire
  • Rebecca Newberger Goldstein: What Plato can teach us

Jonathan Derbyshire

The world of ideas

Rebecca Newberger Goldstein: What Plato can teach us

by Jonathan Derbyshire / October 20, 2014 / Leave a comment
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Linkedin
  • Email
Rebecca Newberger Goldstein © Steven Pinker

Rebecca Newberger Goldstein © Steven Pinker

Anyone who’s done an undergraduate degree in philosophy will have been made to read the great philosophers of the past—the 16th and 17th-century rationalists and empiricists, certainly, probably some Kant, and in all likelihood Plato and Aristotle as well. For decades, particularly in the anglophone world, students were encouraged to treat such monuments of the western tradition as Plato’s Republic or Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason not as relics to be venerated but rather as if they’d been published in the most recent issue of a scholarly journal such as Mind. It’s the arguments in these books that matter, so the thinking went, and if these turned out to be deficient when judged against the most rigorous contemporary standards, then so much the worse for Plato or Kant. That great swathes of the Republic or the first Critique survive this kind of treatment is presumably a sign of greatness.

This is one of the morals to be drawn from Rebecca Newberger Goldstein’s new book, Plato at the Googleplex, in which she imagines Plato reappearing on a book tour in 21st-century America. Goldstein’s Plato is our contemporary, a thinker who still has much to teach us about knowledge, truth, goodness and beauty. Her book is also a defence of the discipline of philosophy itself against those she calls “philosophy-jeerers”—who think there are no interesting or substantive questions that can’t be answered by science. Goldstein, as I discovered when I met her in London last week, thinks not only that certain philosophical questions of the sort Plato asked still resonate, but also that the progress of science will continue to throw up new questions which philosophers are well-placed, if not to answer definitively, then at least to frame in a clarifying way.

JD: The subtitle of the book is “Why Philosophy Won’t Go Away”. So you believe that there are perennial philosophical questions?

RNG: Yes. And I believe that there are new philosophical questions, too. As science advances, it keeps throwing up more philosophical questions. My view of philosophy is as a mediator between the scientific image of us in the world and all the other intuitions that we have and by means of which we try to live coherent lives. And some of them we’ve had to give up because of science. That’s philosophy’s role. Take the foundations of quantum mechanics—that…

YOU’VE HIT THE LIMIT

You have now reached your limit of 3 free articles in the last 30 days.
But don’t worry! You can get another 7 articles absolutely free, simply by entering your email address in the box below.

When you register we’ll also send you a free e-book—Writing with punch—which includes some of the finest writing from our archive of 22 years. And we’ll also send you a weekly newsletter with the best new ideas in politics and philosophy of culture, which you can of course unsubscribe from at any time







Prospect may process your personal information for our legitimate business purposes, to provide you with our newsletter, subscription offers and other relevant information.

Click to learn more about these interests and how we use your data. You will be able to object to this processing on the next page and in all our communications.

258868095dedc74f11ed27.07801916

Go to comments

Related articles

The last interview with Bryan Magee
John Maier / August 7, 2019
A great public intellectual passed away last month. Magee spent his life wonderstruck by...
Homi K Bhabha: Why we need a new, emotive language of human rights
Rebecca Liu / November 5, 2019
The theorist and author of The Location of Culture on the uses of the imagination in...
Share with friends
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Linkedin
  • Email

Comments

  1. Alex
    October 22, 2014 at 12:51
    With all due respect, Frege did not publish "The Foundations of Arithmetic" in 1879. It was published in 1884 I believe. And this book started the linguistic turn in philosophy. But in any case, please be cautious about the fact and fact-checking.
  2. whiskeylove
    October 22, 2014 at 14:51
    Thank you for the interview, Mr. Derbyshire and Dr. Goldstein. I greatly admire Dr. Goldstein's work. One thing: Foundations of Arithmetic was published in 1884, Begriffsschrift in 1879. So did Dr. Goldstein once believe philosophy started in 1879, or with the Foundations? : )
  3. Arnold Trehub
    October 22, 2014 at 16:06
    The question: Is mathematics a human invention or a human discovery, stimulated, by far, more responses than any other question on the web forum Research Gate.
  4. Ted Schrey Montreal
    October 22, 2014 at 16:56
    Invention or discovery? Fascinating question. I suspect Plato would have said 'discovery'? But I think 'invention' would be right.
    1. pkbrando
      October 24, 2014 at 01:10
      Neither. Mathematics is a language that is very effective in describing the way things happen. As such, it is an action, not an entity.
      1. Mark Titus
        October 25, 2014 at 23:18
        I think you are right. When human beings looked at their fingers and toes, and gave them a little thought, mathematics was invented and discovered.
  5. Arnold Trehub
    October 22, 2014 at 20:04
    Rebecca Goldstein: "What I’d like to think [Plato is saying] is that we can’t do it [philosophy] alone, it really has to happen in the clash of points of view. The things we really have to examine are so constitutive of our thinking that we’re not aware them, and so you need these other points of view. And I like to think that Plato is also telling us the more diverse the points of view the better." Isn't the same cautionary note also true of science? Science, as well as philosophy, needs an open clash of points of view. Today, with the communication facilities of the internet, we have an unprecedented opportunity to hash out the the major arguments at the frontiers of science. Active participation in open, moderated, internet forums is surely to be encouraged.
  6. Mark Titus
    October 23, 2014 at 00:20
    Not true I think. The major "clashes of points of view at the frontiers of science" are played out in Science and Nature and other scientific journals. For example, the recent debate over detection of gravity waves from the Big Bang. I think Goldstein is after something else--more connected to Dr. Phil and Oprah than philosophy.
    1. Arnold Trehub
      October 23, 2014 at 15:32
      The scientific journals are essential, but they do not provide the opportunity for the nearly realtime exchanges among active investigators in focussed discussions on the dedicated internet forums.
      1. Mark Titus
        October 24, 2014 at 00:02
        I looked up ResearchGate and appreciate your comment. However, the basic structure of science is in place and "clashes at the frontiers"--basically cosmology and sub-atomic physics-- occur; but I don't see how they can be responsibly addressed in the forums you mention. With philosophy it is quite different. Nothing is in place, and people like Rebecca Goldstein feed off that.
  7. Cliff Styles
    October 23, 2014 at 00:39
    An answer to your Plato on a bumper sticker question, which Goldstein didn't even attempt: 'The ideal is not real, what now?'
  8. Ted Schrey Montreal
    October 26, 2014 at 14:22
    "Mathematics was invented and discovered", is what I learn here. I shall sit back and ponder this a while...about as long as it takes me to have my cake and eat it too.
    1. Mark Titus
      October 26, 2014 at 19:54
      It seems to me many things are mixtures of discovery and invention. Take the steam engine for example.
  9. Ted Schrey Montreal
    October 26, 2014 at 14:34
    "Math is a language...and "as such...an action, not an entity". Action, entity, description, discovery, invention, what else? For something as concise and clear as math, it's all rather convoluted.
  10. Ted Schrey Montreal
    October 27, 2014 at 00:41
    I took the steam engine, looked at it and concluded someone invented it, long before I discovered it parked in the old shed out back. Math is a system of abstractions of one kind or another; these (are made to) refer to aspects of reality. Abstractions do not occur in (physical) reality. However, one can imagine/assume they deal with aspects of reality---but only if one invents such connections.
    1. Mark Titus
      October 27, 2014 at 02:12
      My point was that you have to discover something about water and its phase changes before you can invent steam engines, just as you have to discover something about fingers and toes (that they are "digits") before you can invent arithmetic. Granted, it's a little more complicated in the second case.
  11. Jack B.
    August 5, 2015 at 20:58
    Mark Titus has it right. Reason's principles and techniques are easily found-uncoupled from any putative creators or discoverers--in maths and science, logic and even the law when it ratiocinates unencumbered by fees or precedents. Reason's techniques are embedded in many fields, suggesting that when philosophy tries to apply them to specific areas, it treads not only on oft-trodden soil but soil alien to it. Hence, it is a meaningless discipline.

Prospect's free newsletter

The big ideas that are shaping our world—straight to your inbox. PLUS a free e-book and 7 articles of your choosing on the Prospect website.

Prospect may process your personal information for our legitimate business purposes, to provide you with our newsletter, subscription offers and other relevant information. Click here to learn more about these purposes and how we use your data. You will be able to opt-out of further contact on the next page and in all our communications.

This Month's Magazine

Perspiciatis unde omnis iste natus.

Inside the choice facing voters this General Election—and why the commission that regulates our democracy is struggling to keep up. Plus: Clive James on Wittgenstein, and the real story of Corbynism

Subscribe

Most Popular

  • Read
  • Commented

Is the G7 a dead parrot?

Yes, we should return the Elgin Marbles—and all the other spoils of colonialism

Don't compare Douglas Ford to Donald Trump

Brexiteers hoping that Australia will ride to the rescue are in for a nasty shock

Just how special is human existence? The answer could lie in multiverse theory

Ivan Rogers on Brexit: the worst is yet to come

3 Comments

John le Carré's post-Cold War vision is shot through with a sense of longing

2 Comments

How dare those signed up to hard Brexit lecture Labour on the economy?

2 Comments

Why the London result will decide the next General Election

1 Comments

The precarious success of the national minimum wage

1 Comments

About this author

Jonathan Derbyshire
Jonathan Derbyshire is Executive Comment Editor at the Financial Times, and former managing editor of Prospect
  • Follow Jonathan on:
  • Twitter
More by this author

More by Jonathan Derbyshire

Ian Kershaw—the fall and rise of modern Europe
December 26, 2015
How to beat Marine Le Pen
December 11, 2015
The big ideas of 2016: bipolar Britain
December 10, 2015

Next Prospect events

  • Details

    Prospect Book Club - David Lammy

    London, 2020-03-19

  • Details

    Prospect Book Club - Jack Shenker

    2020-02-17

  • Details

    Prospect Book Club - Amelia Gentleman

    2020-01-27

See more events

Sponsored features

  • Delivering the UK's invisible infrastructure project

  • Future of Aid: the full report

  • A forest fund for the future

  • A new humanitarianism for the modern age

  • The future of sustainable economic development

PrimeTime

The magazine is owned and supported by the Resolution Group, as part of its not-for-profit, public interest activities.

Follow us
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • RSS

Editorial

Editor: Tom Clark
Deputy Editor: Steve Bloomfield
Managing Editor (Arts & Books): Sameer Rahim
Head of Digital: Stephanie Boland
Digital Assistant: Rebecca Liu
Production Editor & Designer: Chris Tilbury
Commissioning Editor: Alex Dean
Creative Director: Mike Turner
US Writer-at-Large: Sam Tanenhaus

Commercial

Commercial Director: Alex Stevenson
Head of Marketing: Paul Mortimer
Marketing and Circulation Executive: Susan Acan
Head of Events: Victoria Jackson
Events Project Manager: Nadine Prospere
Head of Advertising Sales: Adam Kinlan 020 3372 2934
Head of Key Accounts: Scott Smith 020 3372 2972
Senior Account Manager: Patrick Lappin 020 3372 2931

  • Home
  • Advertising
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Acceptable Use Policy
© Prospect Publishing Limited
×
Login
Login with your subscriber account:
You need a valid subscription to login.
I am
Remember Me


Forgotten password?

Or enter with social networking:
Login to post comments using social media accounts.
  • With Twitter
  • Connect
  • With Google +
×
Register Now

Register today and access any 7 articles on the Prospect’s website for FREE in the next 30 days..
PLUS find out about the big ideas that will shape our world—with Prospect’s FREE newsletter sent to your inbox. We'll even send you our e-book—Writing with punch—with some of the finest writing from the Prospect archive, at no extra cost!

Not Now, Thanks

Prospect may process your personal information for our legitimate business purposes, to provide you with our newsletter, subscription offers and other relevant information.

Click to learn more about these interests and how we use your data. You will be able to object to this processing on the next page and in all our communications.

×
You’ve got full access!

It looks like you are a Prospect subscriber.

Prospect subscribers have full access to all the great content on our website, including our entire archive.

If you do not know your login details, simply close this pop-up and click 'Login' on the black bar at the top of the screen, then click 'Forgotten password?', enter your email address and press 'Submit'. Your password will then be emailed to you.

Thank you for your support of Prospect and we hope that you enjoy everything the site has to offer.

This site uses cookies to improve the user experience. By using this site, you agree that we can set and use these cookies. For more details on the cookies we use and how to manage them, see our Privacy and Cookie Policy.