Category Archives: Philosophy

Trash Talks


Trash Talks – Revelations In The Rubbish
By Elizabeth V. Spelman
Oxford University Press – £19.99

In products of intelligent design there is no waste.
The natural world is the product of intelligent design.
Therefore there is no waste in nature.

                                                             (‘Evolutionary Trash’)

Hmm, trash for thought?
Or utter cobblers?
Or in this instance, rubbish?

Throughout Elizabeth V. Spelman’s Trash Talks – Revelations In The Rubbish, there is a whole lot of worldly behaviour to ponder upon so far as the lasting trajectory of waste is concerned. A wide-open cornucopia that has turned some into criminals as a result of fly-tipping, some into thieves as a result of the direct salvaging of financial records, while others into a rife tittle-tattle of class-consciousness due to non-conforming re-cyclists.

Lest it be said that Swindon Borough Council recently took it upon themselves to do away with such hoi polloi ideology, by removing many re-cycling outlets altogether. Were this France, there would undoubtedly be an instantaneous storming of Swindon’s penny-pinching Bastille equivalent overnight. A Euro mode of behaviour which just goes to show that trash does indeed talk – in a variant of ways.

Many of which are more than interestingly addressed throughout these 222 pages.

As Professor of Philosophy at the University of Buffalo, Carolyn Korsmeyer, has noted: ”Far from being merely disposable, what we throw away illuminates both society and our existential selves, for human beings are not only wasteful but themselves become waste in the end. Drawing from sources as varied as Freud and Plato, Veblen, Darwin, and the Buddha, Spelman offers an elegant and original analysis of what trash means when it talks.”

The above opening quote from Chapter Four’s ‘Evolutionary Trash,’ is Charles Darwin, upon whom/which the authoress writes: ”Darwin not only found himself unable to ignore ways in which nature is ‘wasteful,’ ‘clumsy,’ ‘blundering,’ even ‘cruel;’ he quipped that such features would be of great interest and importance to an imagined ‘Devil’s chaplain’ because he recognised that they appeared to present a serious challenge to beliefs about the natural world and its creation shared by many influential scientists and divines active in Darwin’s time […]. Just as Darwin and some of his colleagues regarded the wastefulness found in nature to pose a problem for the hypothesis of intelligent design in the 19th century, many contemporary evolutionary theorists take such waste to be among the difficulties facing current versions of intelligent design: since an intelligent designer surely would not create waste, if there is waste there can’t be intelligent design; but there is waste, so intelligent design cannot be an adequate explanation of the natural world.”

Again, trash for thought or a thought process to be wholeheartedly grappled with?

Either way, Elizabeth Spelman – herself a Professor of Philosophy – has herein written a book a book that really does set the mind to thinking. Not only in relation to what we do actually do with our junk, but how we go about it with regards the big picture (and indeed, that of the wider world).

David Marx

Ethics In The Real World


Ethics In The Real World
82 Brief Essay on Things That Matter
By Peter Singer
Princeton University Press – £19.95

No man is liberated from fear who dare not see his place in the world as it is; no man can achieve the greatness of which he is capable until has has allowed himself to see his own littleness.

Such humble thinking wouldn’t go a miss in the White House right now, not to mention the Turkish Parliament and an array of other so called high places of high-octane power.

It does after all seem that when certain movers and shakers, hipsters and shirkers – be they politicians, financial investors or perhaps worse, City mortgage advisers – reach the penultimate threshold of no longer having to worry about the next pay cheque, they automatically feel compelled to relinquish all and every shred of decency they may have once had.

A quality which may well perhaps, (partially) explain why they are the people they invariably are: usually highly motivated and focused, yet simultaneously dull and exceedingly unpleasant.

In a round-a-bout kind of way, this (partially) accounts for Ethics In The Real World – 82 Brief Essay on Things That Matter being the book it is: real and inspired, provocative, yet relentlessly well thought through and honestly considered. Qualities which ought hardly be surprising, as Peter Singer has often been described as the world’s most influential philosopher, which these 330 pages (excluding Introduction, Acknowledgements and Index) do much to clarify.

One can literally open any page of this most wonderful book, and be wholeheartedly reached by way of unarguable truth – with even the very idea of philosophy itself, already being scrutinized in the book’s Introduction: ”There is a view in some philosophical circles that anything that can be understood by people who have not studied philosophy is not profound enough to be worth saying. To the contrary, I suspect that whatever cannot be said clearly is probably not being thought clearly either.”

And the shedding of light on philosophy doesn’t end there.

The chapter ‘Philosophy On Top,’ actually concludes with the optimistic note: ”More surprising, and possibly even more significant than the benefits of doing philosophy for general reasoning abilities, is the way in which taking a philosophy course can change a person’s life. I know from my own experience that taking a course in philosophy can lead students to turn vegan, pursue careers that enable them to give half their income to effective charities, and even donate a kidney to a stranger. How many other disciplines can say that?”

Indeed, how many other disciplines can say that?

There again, As Singer openly admits: ”Given the practical importance […] as a good utilitarian I ought to aim to write for the broadest possible audience, and not merely for a narrow band of committed utilitarians.”

Broken into eleven prime parts (Big Questions, Animals, Beyond the Ethic of the Sanctity of Life, Bioethics and Public Health, Sex and Gender, Doing Good, Happiness, Politics, Global Governance, Science and Technology, and finally, Living, Playing, Working), these 82 essays traverse all that is fundamentally important in one’s life.

As such, this book ought to be considered as something of a prime humanistic template for (the intrinsic motivation of) one’s everyday behaviour.

David Marx



By Slavoj Zizek
Bloomsbury – £19.99

One need only negotiate this book’s Introduction to partially comprehend the enormity of the philosophical subject matter contained herein: ”[…] when a philosopher deals with another philosopher, his or her stance is not that of a dialogue but of division, of drawing the line that separates truth from falsity, from Plato whose focus is the line that divides truth from mere opinion up to Lenin obsessed with the line that separates materialism from idealism. As Alain Badiou said, a true Idea is one that divides.

Enough philosophical food for initial thought (a mere few pages in)?

From such sub-headings as ‘The subject’s epigenesis’ to ‘In defence of Hegel’s madness’ to ‘The lesson of psychoanalysis;’ from ‘The divine death drive’ to ‘The parallax of drive and desire’ to ‘Materialism or agnosticism,’ Slavoj Zizek’s Disparities is indeed a book of profound philosophical investigation.

Ought this be in the least surprising?

Zizek is after all, a Hegelian philosopher, a Lacanian psychoanalyst as well as a Communist. He is also international Director at the Birkbeck Institute of Humanities at the University of London and visiting Professor at the New York University (not to mention Senior Researcher at the Department of Philosophy at the University of Ljubljana in Slovenia).

So when he continues on from the above opening quote with: ”The present book is an exercise in this art of delimitation: its aim is to specify the contours of the dialectical-materialist notion of disparity by way of drawing a line that separates it from other deceptively similar forms of thought, from Julia Kristeva’s abjection to Robert Pippin’s and Robert Brandom’s version of self-consciousness, from object-oriented ontology to the topic of post-humanity, from the god of negative theology to millenarian politics.,” the art of one’s own previous held delimitation(s), be they political or philosophical, need to be ever so partially reconciled with that of Zisek’s.

Especially if one is to fully comprehend and continue.

Reason being: ”The method of such a procedure is not learned in advance, it emerges retroactively – one should remember here Pascal Quignard’s definition of method: ‘Method is the road after we traversed it.’ Method is not learned in advance: it emerges retroactively.”

Categorised by three distinct different sections (‘The Disparity of Truth: Subject, Object and the Rest,’ ‘The Disparity of Beauty: The Ugly, The Abject and the Minimal Difference’ and ‘The Disparity of the Good: Towards a Materialist Negative Theology’) these 385 pages – excluding Notes and Index – are an in-depth, complex and surprisingly enlightening read if ever there was one.

Although it does have to be said that the book would have benefited from a little light relief from time to time. An abundance of (too much of) anything, especially from a literary angle, is never a particularly good idea.

Under the heading ‘A Comical conclusion,’ this might partially explain the following: ”Today sexuality is more and more reduced to pleasures in partial objects: we are more and more bombarded with objects-gadgets which promise to deliver excessive but effortless pleasure […]. the Stamina Training Unit, a counterpart to the good old vibrator – a masturbatory device that resembles a battery-powered light (so we’re not embarrassed when carrying it around). You put the erect penis into the opening at the top, push the button, and the object vibrates till satisfaction. The product is available in different colours, levels of tightness, and forms (hairy or without hair etc.) that imitate all three openings for sexual penetration (mouth, vagina, anus). What one buys here is the partial object (erogenous zone) alone, deprived of the embarrassing additional burden of having to deal with another entire person. How are we to cope with this brave new world which undermines the basic premises of our intimate life?”

Ahem, it’s the one section of the book nigh guaranteed to make a wider readership sit up listen. And dare I say it, partake in Zisek’s acutely focused, philosophical vision.

As such, the one thing I’d suggest to make Disparities something of a far more forthcoming and ultimately beneficial read, would perhaps be more writing of a personable persuasion.

David Marx

Logic, Truth and Meaning


Logic, Truth and Meaning
By G.E.M. Anscombe
Imprint Academic – £19.95

Logic, Truth and Meaning, now there’s a thought, now there’s a title.

I can think of a great many people I’d like to alert and address those words to: The Islamic State for one; along with Donald Trump, Cameron’s (entire) Cabinet, Sir Philip Greene, scum-bag people traffickers, varying oiks amid Portsmouth’s council estates, Jeremy Kyle and of course, Donald Trump.

Or have I already mentioned him?

Edited into three distinct sections (Part 1: Wittgenstein and the Tractatus, Part 2: Thought and Belief and Part 3: Meaning Truth and Existence), there’s no denying that editors Mary Geach and Luke Gormally have in these 312 pages, covered a wide terrain of idiosyncratic intellectual thought – the sort of which will compel many an inquisitive soul to ponder way beyond the parameters of ones’ comfort zone.

Amid such chapter titles as ‘Elementary Propositions,’ ”Mysticism’ and Solipsism,’ ‘Thought and Existent Objects,’ ‘Grammar, Structure and Essence’ and Existence and the Existential Quantifier,’ it has to be said that much of the writing throughout Logic, Truth and Meaning will no doubt trigger a process of (perhaps inadvertent) questioning. The sort of questioning which will in turn, induce a philosophical snow-ball effect whereby all stands to be gleaned by way of pronounced investigation.

After all, wasn’t it the American writer Glenway Westcott who wrote: Language is a god, sex is a god, time is a god./Fate is a convocation or combination of gods, an entire Olympus?

This fourth (and final) volume of writings by Elizabeth Anscombe essentially reprints her Introduction to Wittgentein’s Tractatus, along with a number of other essays in which she confronts thought and language. The fundamental essence of the essays traversing such in depth issues as truth and existence, reason and representation. So in all, pretty big stuff – of which the following from the fifth chapter of part two of the book is as good an example as any: ”Wittgenstein once answered a question of mine by saying that a lot of the works of philosophy of the recent centuries had titles which either referred to the mind in some fashion, or contained the word ‘principles.’ This very much characterised the philosophies, and that gathered – for in this sentence I have not been quoting his actual words, but only the gist of them […]. However it is not important for me to elucidate Wittgenstein’s earlier or later opinions on experimental psychology. I have said what I have in order to avoid inaccuracy. My main aim is to point to the very great importance of the Tractatus thought that theory of knowledge is philosophy of psychology” (‘Knowledge and Essence’).

As mentioned earlier, the final sentence ”theory of knowledge is philosophy of psychology,” triggers a further process of questioning: Is the theory of knowledge the philosophy of psychology?

As Roger Scruton has written (whose own book, Conversations With Roger Scruton I shall soon be reviewing): ”Elizabeth Anscombe was the most important of Wittgenstein’s pupils, with an intellect as great and wide-ranging as her teacher’s. She thought deeply, wrote beautifully, and was never taken in by pretence.”

That Anscombe was ”never taken in by pretence,” is a truth induced testament to that of not only her work, but her legacy. And for that alone, her philosophy and her writing(s) warrant investigation.

David Marx

The Quotable Kierkegaard


The Quotable Kierkegaard
Edited by Gordon Marino
Princeton University Press – $24.95

As much as the sui generis work(s) of the so-called father of existentialism, Soren Kierkegaard, is herein brought to acute, enthusiastic and colourful bear, it is the director of the Hong Kierkegaard Library at St. Olaf College in Minnesota, Gordon Marino, who may knowingly beguile many a (new) reader unto a path of earnest re-consideration.

Not only does Gordon academically kneel at the alter of all things Kierkegaard, his unrelenting zest throughout this delightful book’s Introduction, is endemic of someone wholly prepared to go out on a philosophical limb. So as to reach, teach, if not actually touch, the reader: ”Most of us feel more urgency about the size of our waistline than about the girth of our capacity for compassion. Doing the right thing still has valence, but it is just one option among many, as in, I want to be a successful lawyer, have a good marriage and family, and be a good guy. Often by daubing a picture that the reader can see himself or herself in, Kierkegaard tries to kindle a concern about the self, but with a different set of categories up his sleeves than we are likely to find in the likes of Eat, Pray, Love and the boundless literature of the self-help happiness market.”

That Gordon recognises as much; whether by way of the Dane’s trajectory of compelling thought or by way of his own, is in itself, commendable.

Surely this is a quality which, like much of The Quotable Kierkegaard as a whole, is frank, illuminating, and within the literary world of philosophical prowess especially, surprisingly refreshing.

As much is underlined by the issue of how the author came to stumble upon ”the Mozart of the spirit” in the first place: ”I came to Kierkegaard crawling on cut glass and on the tail of a brutal marital breakup. I had dropped out of graduate school for the second time. My untethered life was like a page from a newspaper blowing around in the wind.”

It was probably due to having been simultaneously ”untethered” and in pain, that Gordon got to embrace the true value of Kierkegaard’s philosophical currency: ”And if there was one thing that […] the preternaturally talented Kierkegaard was convinced of, it was this: in the realm of the spirit, all worldly differences, talents, and bank accounts will have no purchase. Pascal famously said that if we could just learn to sit still for ten minutes and do without distractions, there would be no more wars […]. Rather than pass on knowledge, Kierkegaard hoped to direct us to the study of ourselves. He once confessed, ”I want to make people aware so that they do not squander and waste their lives.””

Drawn from the authoritative Princeton editions of Kierkegaard’s many, many writings, The Quotable Kierkegaard includes an Introduction (as in the above quotations), a brief account/timeline of his life and a guide to further reading.

So in all, this most quotable of literary companions makes for illuminati induced reading. Then again, the book does contain some eight-hundred quotes, of which the following is perhaps one of my favourites:

”But the person who can scarcely open himself cannot love, and the person who cannot love is the unhappiest of all.”

David Marx

Honorable Bandit – A Walk Across Corsica


Honorable Bandit – A Walk Across Corsica
By Brian Bouldrey
Terrace Books/University of Wisconsin Press –  $26.95

Brian Bouldrey teaches creative writing at Northwestern University in the USA, has already written six books and edited several others; including three volumes of Best American Gay Fiction. So in coming to read Honourable Bandit – A Walk Across Corsica (my first of his books), I wasn’t quite sure what to expect – but somehow had a feeling it would probably be anchored within the parameters of good writing.

Suffice to say, I wasn’t disappointed.

A textured, snapshot view of the Corsican hiking trail through Bouldrey and his German friend, Petra’s eyes, does indeed, make for an interesting, if not overtly American travelogue; that is both thoughtful and philosophical. Thoughtful, because of the gentle considerdness of the writing, philosophical, because of some of the issues contained within the actual writing: ”If you steal a loaf of bread, you go to jail; if you steal a railroad, you’re a senator” (‘Why I Walk – Walk-Off’); ””I have walked myself into my best thoughts,” said Soren Kiegegaard, ”and I know of no thought so burdensome that one cannot walk away from it;”” ”I do my best thinking in crowds, oddly enough, at the symphony or during a play. Dull plays are best for thinking. My playbill is always coated with notes scrawled in the dark concert hall or theatre, sad inscrutable scribble, and usless once the lights are up. When walking, the only thing that can save me from my own shallow thoughts is civilized conversation with a fellow walker.
”Shut up, stupid German girl.”
”Shut up, stupid American boy.”” (‘Jet Lag’).

Comfortable, colourful and simultaneously witty, Honourable Bandit is a pleasant and slightly provocative read, that, although perhaps a little too opinionated for its own good (although said dictum could just as readily be applied to most writing); is still nevertheless distinctive enough to linger.

As Tim Miller – he who wrote 1001 Beds has been quoted as saying: ”A remarkable achievement. Deeply felt, humorous, and extremely wise, Honorable Bandit takes the reader on a journey across Corsica, but even more takes us on a charged – Dantean, at times – journey that explores the nuanced corners of life: our most intimate infernos, purgatories, and paradiosos, all on one island.”

To a degree, I cannot help but agree – as there really is a very deep sense of thought taking place amid these 234 pages. As for Dantean thinking, I’ll leave you with the following excerpt (from ‘Lammergeier’): ”I must rephrase my wonder – how is it that beautiful things come out of ugly things? There is Dante again, betraying his own personal hatred, his own voceru, until it turned into lyric in The Inferno. Picasso’s Guernica transforming genocide, if not redeeming it. What art, after all, isn’t begotten of pain? Could something beautiful come out of all the terrorism, all our military maneuvers? And who will do the transforming?”

David Marx

Evil Men


Evil Men
By James Dawes
Harvard University Press – £19.95

I do believe there’s a lot to be said for writing about things in such a way that most people can relate to. Regardless of the subject matter, whether it’s poetry or philosophy, music or madness, theology or torture. I mention the latter because torture is one of the prime areas brought to bear throughout Evil Men by James Dawes.

A book that to my mind, really ought to have touched, if not effected the reader in a far more profound way than it unfortunately does.

Referring to many first-hand discussions with convicted war criminals of the Second Sino-Japanese War of 1937–1945 (upon which this book is fundamentally based), the author occasionally summons the reader unto a certain considered darkness, that is no more disturbing or dare I say it, substantially revealing, than that which is currently taking place in Syria.

To be sure, I’m none the wiser for having read this book – regardless of how staunchly I wanted to be. The revelations by an assortment of the very soldiers who perpetrated some of the worst crimes imaginable – such as murder, rape and medical examination upon living subjects – remain subliminally confined within the parameters of the far too clinical and the far too scientific.

None of the reasoning behind any of the barbarity, let alone any of the physical and emotional hurt it must so obviously have caused, is quintessentially divulged. As a result, much of the book reads as if we should already know the reasoning behind why one person, or several, simultaneously, can do such ghastly things to another person.

By quoting the scholar Dorothy Hale towards the end of the book – one of many scholars who is currently working to integrate theoretical work into the language and rhetoric of human rights – Dawes draws our attention to the ever increasing underlying acceptance of flippant and/or spontaneous cruelty: ‘’The all-too visible incarceration of subjectivity by aesthetic form is decried as an abuse of representational power. The author who must more or less use a character for his or her expressive ends is felt to be exploitative. The reader who identifies with a character worries about emotional colonization. And the reader and author who feel only the aesthetic thrill of the character’s fate carry the guilt of the voyeur.’’

Upon reflection, this can be especially relevant with regards the character-driven world of inexorable callousness within certain dramatized literature; such as that found within the character traits of both protagonists in Hubert Selby Jr’s Last Exit To Brooklyn and Anthony Burgess’ A Clockwork Orange. Not to mention the filmmaker, Quentin Tarantino’s Pulp Fiction as a whole.

Yet, rather than embrace the almost bankrupt humanity of this book’s sordid subject matter, Dawes tries exceedingly hard to ultimately decipher, if not deliver. This is partially evident, where he writes in immediate response to the above: ‘’This guilty pleasure, however, is precisely the starting point of a literary ethics. In novels, the argument goes, we encounter characters as simultaneously free persons and constrained aesthetic artifacts. They exceed our ways of knowing, and because this unsettles us, we seek to reduce them to limited things that we can understand. In this way, literature holds up a mirror to our own being in the world, allowing us to see – or rather, to experience – the way all of our human possibility ‘’is produced in and through the operation of social constraint.’’’’

Surely ‘’the operation of social constraint,’’ is the very premise upon which Evil Men is based? ‘’The operation of social constraint’’ is the ultimate presupposition that the author endeavours to comprehensively dissect, no?

And in so doing, hopefully engage and enlighten the reader.

Rather than truly touch on the underlying behaviour behind the potential for despicable cruelty, James Dawes, has within these 224 pages, done much to further the argument; but very little to quench any philosophical thirst for profound reasoning.

As he poignantly states at the very outset of this academic analysis: ‘’If Elie Wiesel is right in saying that to forget is to kill twice, then the Second Sino-Japanese War never ended. It just shifted to the landscape of memory.’’

Evil Men is something of juxtaposition: it may well ensure that evil men aren’t forgotten, but in so doing, it does much to elongate the painful landscape of memory itself.

David Marx