Saturday, May 20, 2006

Philosopher Cornered

(There's a title I've used before, but what the hell)

A [man] finds in himself a talent whose cultivation would make him a useful man for all sorts of purposes. But he sees himself in comfortable circumstances, and he prefers to give himself up to pleasure rather than to bother about increasing and improving his fortunate natural aptitudes. Yet he asks himself further "Does my maxim of neglecting my natural gifts, besides agreeing in itself with my tendency to indulgence, agree also with what is called duty?" He then sees that a system of nature could indeed always subsist under such a universal law, although (like the South Sea Islanders) every man should let his talents rust and should be bent on devoting his life solely to idleness, indulgence, procreation, and, in a word, to enjoyment. Only he cannot possibly will that this should become a universal law of nature or should be implanted in us as such a law by a natural instinct. For as a rational being he necessarily wills that all his powers should be developed, since they serve him, and are given him, for all sorts of possible ends.
Immanuel Kant Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals (my literals & glosses)
That's the third of four examples Kant uses to illustrate the application of Categorical Imperative No 2, "The Formula of the Law of Nature", to wit:
Act as if the maxim of your action were to become through your will a universal law of nature.

Kant's argument here, roughly nutshelled, is that if every talented person in the world acted like those South Sea Islanders and lounged around drinking and passing around social diseases all day, not a lot of work would get done and a lot of people - except those with natural aptitudes for drinking and innovative fornication - would waste their God-given talents. Personally, I don't share Kant's conviction that this would necessarily be a bad thing. Neither, apparently did the crew of The Bounty, among others.

What sort of talents would it take to make a man useful for all sorts of purposes? We needn't concern ourselves with women. After all Kant didn't - philosophical legend (which I've checked with various members of philosophy faculties over the years) has it that he died a virgin. Apparently his own duty to cultivate his natural talents didn't extend to passing it on to the next generation. That's a little ungenerous - let's give due consideration to the possibility that even in Eighteenth Century Germany "It's your duty to help me perpetuate my philosophical genius into the future" would have been a lousy pick-up line.

Leaving aside Kant's obviously useful, and scrupulously cultivated, talent for philosophy, the field is pretty well wide open. As long as it makes us useful men. For some purpose, or purposes. To whom we have to be useful and how is left pretty open. And look, discriminatory as it might appear, I am going to leave the women out of this because I've go no intention of buying into a big blog-fight by telling women how to make themselves useful.

So let's suppose our hypothetical man discovers that his natural talents are for sycophancy, bullying and manipulation. In modern society, he can find any number of opportunities to make himself useful - to society at large, as a politician, to the shareholders of a corporation as their CEO. And in whatever capacity he employs his talent to make himself useful to others, you can be sure it will be equally useful to himself. If not more so.

Obviously such an individual - sorry, such a man - is duty bound to nurture those talents, even if he has the means to take himself off to the South Seas for a life of more or less carefree carousal with the occasonal interlude of bed rest and antibiotics. And even though the rest of us might wish that a man so blessed with wealth and natural talent would take the South Seas option, the Kantian position is pretty clear. Some people just have to be bastards and that's the way it should be.


Anonymous said...

Gummo, was there any particular bastard whose sycophancy, bullying and manipulations you had in mind?

They should be honoured to be the inspiration of such reflections.

Gummo Trotsky said...

Well ... No one recent, that's for sure. maybe a certain ex-employer or come to think of it, several ex-bosses might fit the mould ...

Helen said...

A few Liberal cabinet members come to mind.

As for ones natural talents being for mainly drinking and wasting time, unfortunately that's true of many of my extended family.

Andrew Elder said...

This is my first visit to your site, and I like it.

I read this post, then scrolled down and read your "My name aint Legion" post. What if these natural talents were suppressed not by fucking around (in its various manifestations) but by depression?

Kant also doesn't allow for people who not only use their powers for evil instead of good, as you put it, but who also mean well but botch it and end up somewhere other than where they intended to go.

Gummo Trotsky said...


I suppose depression might be considered a natural talent for feeling unhappy over prolonged periods. Should one therefore cultivate it?

And what about a natural talent for sending out spam comments, like the two I just deleted from this thread.

Never was a big fan of Kantian ethics ;)

small business web hosting said...

small business web hosting BLOGGGGGGGERS

I would like to tell everyone I know about a new web site for small business web hosting... If you are looking on ways to mkae money starting a business and need a site to host it on . Visit Today

Christmas Ornament Ideas said...

Enjoyed your blog! Christmas tree star ornaments These ornaments are Presented in a handsome velvet drawstring bag. Please visit Christmas tree star ornaments