What do you think?
Rate this book
Popular Culture and Philosophy #76
The Good Wife and Philosophy: Temptations of Saint Alicia
In The Good Wife and Philosophy , fifteen philosophers look at the deeper issues raised by this stirring TV drama.
The Good Wife gives us courtroom battles in the tradition of Perry Mason , with the added dimension of a political intrigue and a tormented personal story. We witness the interplay between common morality and legal correctness; sometimes following one violates the other. Lawyers operate within the law and within legal ethics, yet routinely do harmful things in pursuit of their clients’ interests. The adversarial system leads to such strategies as stringing out a case to exhaust the other side’s resources and bringing suits ostensibly because of wrongdoing by defendants but really to curtail the defendants as a competitive threat to some important client’s interest.
The idea for The Good Wife came from the recurring news drama of wives standing by their husbands when scandal the wives of Bill Clinton, Elliott Spitzer, and John Edwards. Often these politicians’ spouses are themselves lawyers who have had to cope with the gray areas of legal battles and maneuvering. Following her husband’s disgrace and imprisonment, Alicia Florrick has to return to the law, which she abandoned for the sake of being a full-time wife and mother.
The Good Wife gives us courtroom battles in the tradition of Perry Mason , with the added dimension of a political intrigue and a tormented personal story. We witness the interplay between common morality and legal correctness; sometimes following one violates the other. Lawyers operate within the law and within legal ethics, yet routinely do harmful things in pursuit of their clients’ interests. The adversarial system leads to such strategies as stringing out a case to exhaust the other side’s resources and bringing suits ostensibly because of wrongdoing by defendants but really to curtail the defendants as a competitive threat to some important client’s interest.
The idea for The Good Wife came from the recurring news drama of wives standing by their husbands when scandal the wives of Bill Clinton, Elliott Spitzer, and John Edwards. Often these politicians’ spouses are themselves lawyers who have had to cope with the gray areas of legal battles and maneuvering. Following her husband’s disgrace and imprisonment, Alicia Florrick has to return to the law, which she abandoned for the sake of being a full-time wife and mother.
288 pages, Paperback
First published June 17, 2013
1 person is currently reading
53 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
July 10, 2013
Wow. Not only does this book make you appreciate the subtle philosophical threads woven into the show, but the philosophers in this book discuss very practical, relevant issues that will probably affect American society for many years to come. The discussions range from the ethical paradox of drone strikes, to ethical and legal approaches for assessing the underhanded and downright dirty tactics lawyers often employ in their "pursuit of justice," to feminism and a scathing admonishment against infidelity. Perhaps one of the most practical and yet accessible philosophical works you will read this summer.
November 22, 2019
I feel like a just finished a college philosophy course or started law school. I always really enjoyed The Good Wife and thought it was a well written show, that also offered great entertainment. Each chapter of this book is written by a different Legal Scholar. It discusses far reaching topics. This certainly is not a fast and light read for 200 pages. If you are looking for that, definitely you will not like this book. However, I sometimes do like to be challenged and hear many different philosophical theories and legal arguments. To think, the shows episode writers, certainly were bringing these elements in was pretty incredible.
The 2nd Chapter, had a fun fact, about show named Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot, which if taking each letter=WTF. Well, it certainly was a very messed up situation, about a soldier that Alicia represents. It brings in the topic of drones, and who ultimately is responsible for when something goes wrong with firing one. Leaves much to think about. The answers are not certain. There is a discussion about a very, morally reprehensible man, Colin Sweeney. We are introduced to the theory of Utilitarianism, brought forward by Jeremy Bentham and Stuart Mills. Consequences of action to all affected helps decide if ethical or not. There is discussion of Greek Philosophy and it’s 3 types of love.
So, once I got to try and absorb these many and other philosophies; it also intersected or conflicted with more contemporary ideas of individualism and feminism which start coming into practice as Alicia goes back to work at Lockhart and Gardner. The reason, as any Good Wife fan knows, is her husband, Peter has cheated on her countless times with prostitutes and it’s all over the news. What makes her decide to still remain married? Is it a sense of a chance he will change? Of duty to her children and family? Or just being unofficially separated is easier then making a choice?
Alicia does begin to change though. She really enjoys her job and is getting more adept at it each case. She starts to realize her inherent value and questions if she owes Peter help with his Political career. There is also Will Gardner, who she has a strong attraction to. She always has, but is juggling teenage children, a new legal career, a floating husband, and maintaining this. Is it right to give in and pursue an affair with Will? She starts making more demands, not young romantic plans. Love, when she tells him, she wants a plan. Romance is easy, it’s the parent conferences that are hard. Another words: come through, really be present, my equal, my partner, and make a thought out adult commitment.
There is an element of elitism here. Yes, most discussions about woman, family, and jobs are books or on the screen about white, married, well-off, well educated women with paths to really interesting and challenging work. This is the case in this show, too. I do find that somewhat problematic. Still, it is addressing the theme of women being so prevalent in the workforce. There is discussion of Carol Gilligan, how women reason differently due to their life experiences. Woman always have and still do take much more care of children, the household, the aging parents, and elements of care. So, there is the ‘Care Ethic’. Sandra Day O’Connor said, ‘Having family responsibilities and concerns just has to make you a more understanding person’.
One element that I think needs more discussion is Diane Lockhart does not get married or have children. I think it would be very difficult for her to have run a law firm and been having children, too. I think she is aware of this. Alicia has children and really loves her job. Clearly, taking time off, if able to, is not considered a good choice, as one lawyer does this to be a mother. I think more discussion of men’s and women’s roles in present society, must ask that provisions are made to include father’s (without penalty, and there is) involvement in this process. It should not just be about mom’s always having to figure this out. Men need room to be dad’s and also be in the workforce. Woman need that, too. We need to support that as a culture. Also, I think temperament plays a role. Not every man wants to rise to the top of his company and not every woman does either. One person might like working a 12 hour day in the work force and another happy to take care of life at home, which also includes many hours and dedication. Perhaps, this balance would make each person happiest since duties are split and discussed. It does not ‘have to be the woman at home’ and ‘the man working tons of office hours’. It could be reversed. However, when cultural pressures and allowances push you so much in one direction, it is almost impossible for either sex to truly decide the best choice for their families.
Still, great discussions. Tons to think about. This show was terrific and always had a heart to it with complex characters. I know, I will forever think of it’s show runners, Michelle and Robert King differently. Excellent.
The 2nd Chapter, had a fun fact, about show named Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot, which if taking each letter=WTF. Well, it certainly was a very messed up situation, about a soldier that Alicia represents. It brings in the topic of drones, and who ultimately is responsible for when something goes wrong with firing one. Leaves much to think about. The answers are not certain. There is a discussion about a very, morally reprehensible man, Colin Sweeney. We are introduced to the theory of Utilitarianism, brought forward by Jeremy Bentham and Stuart Mills. Consequences of action to all affected helps decide if ethical or not. There is discussion of Greek Philosophy and it’s 3 types of love.
So, once I got to try and absorb these many and other philosophies; it also intersected or conflicted with more contemporary ideas of individualism and feminism which start coming into practice as Alicia goes back to work at Lockhart and Gardner. The reason, as any Good Wife fan knows, is her husband, Peter has cheated on her countless times with prostitutes and it’s all over the news. What makes her decide to still remain married? Is it a sense of a chance he will change? Of duty to her children and family? Or just being unofficially separated is easier then making a choice?
Alicia does begin to change though. She really enjoys her job and is getting more adept at it each case. She starts to realize her inherent value and questions if she owes Peter help with his Political career. There is also Will Gardner, who she has a strong attraction to. She always has, but is juggling teenage children, a new legal career, a floating husband, and maintaining this. Is it right to give in and pursue an affair with Will? She starts making more demands, not young romantic plans. Love, when she tells him, she wants a plan. Romance is easy, it’s the parent conferences that are hard. Another words: come through, really be present, my equal, my partner, and make a thought out adult commitment.
There is an element of elitism here. Yes, most discussions about woman, family, and jobs are books or on the screen about white, married, well-off, well educated women with paths to really interesting and challenging work. This is the case in this show, too. I do find that somewhat problematic. Still, it is addressing the theme of women being so prevalent in the workforce. There is discussion of Carol Gilligan, how women reason differently due to their life experiences. Woman always have and still do take much more care of children, the household, the aging parents, and elements of care. So, there is the ‘Care Ethic’. Sandra Day O’Connor said, ‘Having family responsibilities and concerns just has to make you a more understanding person’.
One element that I think needs more discussion is Diane Lockhart does not get married or have children. I think it would be very difficult for her to have run a law firm and been having children, too. I think she is aware of this. Alicia has children and really loves her job. Clearly, taking time off, if able to, is not considered a good choice, as one lawyer does this to be a mother. I think more discussion of men’s and women’s roles in present society, must ask that provisions are made to include father’s (without penalty, and there is) involvement in this process. It should not just be about mom’s always having to figure this out. Men need room to be dad’s and also be in the workforce. Woman need that, too. We need to support that as a culture. Also, I think temperament plays a role. Not every man wants to rise to the top of his company and not every woman does either. One person might like working a 12 hour day in the work force and another happy to take care of life at home, which also includes many hours and dedication. Perhaps, this balance would make each person happiest since duties are split and discussed. It does not ‘have to be the woman at home’ and ‘the man working tons of office hours’. It could be reversed. However, when cultural pressures and allowances push you so much in one direction, it is almost impossible for either sex to truly decide the best choice for their families.
Still, great discussions. Tons to think about. This show was terrific and always had a heart to it with complex characters. I know, I will forever think of it’s show runners, Michelle and Robert King differently. Excellent.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews