Why the human and natural world is not as intelligible to us as we think it is
Wishful thinking is a deeply ingrained human trait that has had a long-term distorting effect on ethical thinking. Many influential ethical views depend on the optimistic assumption that, despite appearances to the contrary, the human and natural world in which we live could, eventually, be made to make sense to us. In A World without Why , Raymond Geuss challenges this assumption.
The essays in this collection―several of which are published here for the first time―explore the genesis and historical development of this optimistic configuration in ethical thought and the ways in which it has shown itself to be unfounded and misguided. Discussions of Greco-Roman antiquity and of the philosophies of Socrates, Plato, Hegel, Marx, Nietzsche, and Adorno play a central role in many of these essays. Geuss also ranges over such topics as the concepts of intelligibility, authority, democracy, and criticism; the role of lying in politics; architecture; the place of theology in ethics; tragedy and comedy; and the struggle between realism and our search for meaning.
Characterized by Geuss's wide-ranging interests in literature, philosophy, and history, and by his political commitment and trenchant style, A World without Why raises fundamental questions about the viability not just of specific ethical concepts and theses, but of our most basic assumptions about what ethics could and must be.
Raymond Geuss, Emeritus Professor in the Faculty of Philosophy, University of Cambridge, is a political philosopher and scholar of 19th and 20th century European philosophy.
Cherishing each Geuss essay collection deliberately since it’s a precious but exhaustible resource — the last (and title) essay of the collection being more or less his notice of retirement from academic philosophy.
Geuss's erudite and humane gloom is charming. Animated by the kind of despairing Leftism that believes the Left has never won, and that if it has ever won, it has therefore immediately lost.
Absolutely worth reading for anyone interested in metaphysics, existentialism, etc. I really appreciated Geuss's Nietzschean critical attitude toward much of philosophy. There are many strands of thought in philosophy and other disciplines that perhaps are not necessary at all, yet they themselves create some kind of artificial need that they then seek to satisfy. I loved all of the Kant hate, as well as the criticism of philosophical movements like analytic philosophy, etc.
Wonderfully evocative ideas and wonderful writing. I'll come back to this book- as I suspect other reviewers will - as I know there is much that I missed. A set of essays to be mined again and again.