Does Philosophy Need a New Name?

More
If philosophers want to update their antiquated image, maybe other fields should consider doing the same.

philospher.jpg

Rybkina2009/Shutterstock

Commenters, bloggers, and Twitterers are having great sport with the philosopher Colin McGinn's proposal to rename his field, following the physicists, chemists, and biologists who emerged from the discipline as independent scientific disciplines. I suspect most have overlooked the tongue-in-cheek nature of the piece as I read it. 

In fact if I were a philosopher, one of the distinctions that would interest me most is the difficulty that artificial intelligence programs have in recognizing sarcasm and irony. (There's the story that the Columbia philosopher Sidney Morgenbesser, hearing a visiting speaker assert that while there were languages in which a double negative signifies a positive, but none where a double positive means a negative, piped up from the back of the room, "Yeah, yeah!")

Why do I think he's pulling our leg? I'm sure he is aware that philosophy has been gaining rather than losing in stature, as I suggested here. Consider his preferred expression Ontics, a professor thereof being an onticist. Doesn't that sound like something out of Portnoy's Complaint? Another expression he favors, Beology, is so Anglocentric, unlike the present Greek-derived word, that Germans might need to translate it as the study of the field of existence, or Seinfeld.

Distinguished philosophers make such proposals when they get bored. Daniel Dennett must have been sincere about proposing "brights" (by analogy to "gays") as a new term for nonbelievers, but I suspect he realized that even many skeptics, like Chris Mooney, would reject the idea. But he did succeed in making his (valid) point that while the mainstream is becoming more tolerant in sexual and gender matters, atheists are still fair game politically.

McGinn's blog post is obviously an invitation to other humanities fields to rebrand themselves as well. My own, History, could emerge as, for example, Retrodictive Heuristics. And departments of religion could change their names to Non-Bright Studies.
Jump to comments
Presented by

Edward Tenner is a historian of technology and culture. He was a founding advisor of Smithsonian's Lemelson Center and holds a Ph.D in European history. More

Edward Tenner is an independent writer and speaker on the history of technology and the unintended consequences of innovation. He holds a Ph.D. in European history from the University of Chicago and was executive editor for physical science and history at Princeton University Press. A former member of the Harvard Society of Fellows and John Simon Guggenheim fellow, he has been a visiting lecturer at Princeton and has held visiting research positions at the Institute for Advanced Study, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, and the Princeton Center for Information Technology Policy. He is now an affiliate of the Center for Arts and Cultural Policy of Princeton's Woodrow Wilson School. He was a founding advisor of Smithsonian's Lemelson Center, where he remains a senior research associate.

Get Today's Top Stories in Your Inbox (preview)

Sad Desk Lunch: Is This How You Want to Die?

How to avoid working through lunch, and diseases related to social isolation.


Elsewhere on the web

Join the Discussion

After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register. blog comments powered by Disqus

Video

Where Time Comes From

The clocks that coordinate your cellphone, GPS, and more

Video

Computer Vision Syndrome and You

Save your eyes. Take breaks.

Video

What Happens in 60 Seconds

Quantifying human activity around the world

Writers

Up
Down

More in National

From This Author

Just In