What do you think?
Rate this book
Field Notes #1
On Risk
With COVID-19 comes a heightened sense of everyday risk. How should a society manage, distribute, and conceive of it?
As we cope with the lengthening effects of the global COVID-19 pandemic, considerations of everyday risk have been more pressing, and inescapable. In the past, everyone engaged in some degree of risky behaviour, from mundane realities like taking a shower or getting into a car to purposely thrill-seeking activities like rock-climbing or BASE jumping. Many activities that seemed high-risk, such as flying, were claimed basically safe. But risk was, and always has been, a fact of life. With new focus on the risks of even leaving the safety of our homes, it’s time for a deeper consideration of risk itself. How do we manage and distribute risks? How do we predict uncertain outcomes? If risk can never be completely eliminated, can it perhaps be controlled? At the heart of these questions—which govern everything from waking up each day to the abstract mathematics of actuarial science—lie philosophical issues of life, death, and danger. Mortality is the event-horizon of daily risk. How should we conceive of it?
Praise for On Risk
“Timely.” —Margaret Atwood
“Kingwell offers a slender, thoughtful, sometimes meandering disquisition on risk that “is inflected (or infected) by the virus, but not precisely about the virus—except as it grants new urgency to old questions of risk and politics. A host of cultural allusions—from Shakespeare to the Simpsons, Isaiah Berlin to Irving Berlin, Voltaire, Pascal, and Derrida—along with salient academic studies inspire Kingwell to examine the many contradictory ways that humans handle risk … An entertaining gloss on an enduring conundrum.”—Kirkus Reviews
“On Risk is equal parts page turner and timely treatise.” —Open Book
Praise for Mark Kingwell
“Kingwell is dauntingly well-read … a gifted noticer … a lively writer [who] cites The Simpsons as often as Immanuel Kant. [Readers] are rewarded with neat, unexpected insights.” —Globe & Mail
“[Kingwell] has grown into a pretty clever jack-of-almost-everything.”—National Post
“Mark Kingwell is a beautiful writer, a lucid thinker and a patient teacher … His insights are intellectual anchors in a fast-changing world.”—Naomi Klein
As we cope with the lengthening effects of the global COVID-19 pandemic, considerations of everyday risk have been more pressing, and inescapable. In the past, everyone engaged in some degree of risky behaviour, from mundane realities like taking a shower or getting into a car to purposely thrill-seeking activities like rock-climbing or BASE jumping. Many activities that seemed high-risk, such as flying, were claimed basically safe. But risk was, and always has been, a fact of life. With new focus on the risks of even leaving the safety of our homes, it’s time for a deeper consideration of risk itself. How do we manage and distribute risks? How do we predict uncertain outcomes? If risk can never be completely eliminated, can it perhaps be controlled? At the heart of these questions—which govern everything from waking up each day to the abstract mathematics of actuarial science—lie philosophical issues of life, death, and danger. Mortality is the event-horizon of daily risk. How should we conceive of it?
Praise for On Risk
“Timely.” —Margaret Atwood
“Kingwell offers a slender, thoughtful, sometimes meandering disquisition on risk that “is inflected (or infected) by the virus, but not precisely about the virus—except as it grants new urgency to old questions of risk and politics. A host of cultural allusions—from Shakespeare to the Simpsons, Isaiah Berlin to Irving Berlin, Voltaire, Pascal, and Derrida—along with salient academic studies inspire Kingwell to examine the many contradictory ways that humans handle risk … An entertaining gloss on an enduring conundrum.”—Kirkus Reviews
“On Risk is equal parts page turner and timely treatise.” —Open Book
Praise for Mark Kingwell
“Kingwell is dauntingly well-read … a gifted noticer … a lively writer [who] cites The Simpsons as often as Immanuel Kant. [Readers] are rewarded with neat, unexpected insights.” —Globe & Mail
“[Kingwell] has grown into a pretty clever jack-of-almost-everything.”—National Post
“Mark Kingwell is a beautiful writer, a lucid thinker and a patient teacher … His insights are intellectual anchors in a fast-changing world.”—Naomi Klein
- GenresNonfictionPhilosophy
154 pages, Paperback
Published January 1, 2020
9 people are currently reading
91 people want to read
About the author
Mark Kingwell
62 books57 followersMark Gerald Kingwell B.A, M.Litt, M.Phil, PhD, D.F.A. (born March 1, 1963) is a Canadian philosopher who is currently professor of philosophy and associate chair at the University of Toronto's Department of Philosophy. Kingwell is a fellow of Trinity College and a Senior Fellow of Massey College. He specialises in theories of politics and culture.
Kingwell has published twelve different books, most notably, A Civil Tongue: Justice, Dialogue, and the Politics of Pluralism, which was awarded the Spitz Prize for political theory in 1997. In 2000 Kingwell received an honorary Doctor of Fine Arts from the Nova Scotia College of Art and Design, for contributions to theory and criticism. He has held visiting posts at various institutions including: Cambridge University, University of California at Berkeley, and City University of New York where he held the title of Weissman Distinguished Professor of Humanities.
He studied at the University of Toronto, editing The Varsity through 1983 to 1984 and the University of Toronto Review from 84-85. He received his BA degree from the University of St. Michael's College with High Distinction in 1985, his MLitt degree from Edinburgh University in 1987, and both his M.Phil and PhD degrees from Yale University in 1989 and 1991 respectively. He was married to Gail Donaldson in 1988. The marriage ended in divorce in 2004.
Kingwell is a contributing editor to Harper's Magazine, the literary quarterly Descant, the political monthly This Magazine and the Globe and Mail books section. He was also a drinks columnist for the men's magazine Toro. He was formerly a columnist for the National Post, and a contributing editor of Saturday Night. He frequently appears on television and radio, often on the CBC, and is well known for his appearance in the documentary film The Corporation. He has delivered, among others, the George Grant, Harold Innis, Marx Wartofsky and Larkin-Stuart memorial lectures.
Kingwell’s work has been translated into ten languages, and he lectures to academic and popular audiences around the world. From 2001 to 2004, he was chair of the Institute for Contemporary Culture at the Royal Ontario Museum. His work on philosophy, art, and architecture has appeared in many leading academic journals and magazines, including The Journal of Philosophy, Philosophical Forum, Ethics, Political Theory, and the Yale Journal of Law and the Humanities, the New York Times and The New York Times Magazine, Utne Reader, Adbusters, the Walrus, Harvard Design Magazine,Canadian Art, Azure, Toronto Life, the Globe and Mail, and the National Post.
Kingwell is one of two University of Toronto professors teaching a first year philosophy course entitled Introduction to Philosophy. Kingwell teaches his class in Victoria College's Isabel Bader Theatre, with a class size of around 700 students. He has also been part of the University of Trinity College's TrinityOne program, for which he taught a seminar class entitled Ethics and the Creative Imagination.
He describes himself as a social democrat and a "recovering Catholic". According to the Canadian Who's Who 2006, he also enjoys running, baseball, basketball, jazz, films and pop music. He has two brothers: a younger brother named Sean Kingwell and an older brother named Steven Kingwell.
Kingwell has published twelve different books, most notably, A Civil Tongue: Justice, Dialogue, and the Politics of Pluralism, which was awarded the Spitz Prize for political theory in 1997. In 2000 Kingwell received an honorary Doctor of Fine Arts from the Nova Scotia College of Art and Design, for contributions to theory and criticism. He has held visiting posts at various institutions including: Cambridge University, University of California at Berkeley, and City University of New York where he held the title of Weissman Distinguished Professor of Humanities.
He studied at the University of Toronto, editing The Varsity through 1983 to 1984 and the University of Toronto Review from 84-85. He received his BA degree from the University of St. Michael's College with High Distinction in 1985, his MLitt degree from Edinburgh University in 1987, and both his M.Phil and PhD degrees from Yale University in 1989 and 1991 respectively. He was married to Gail Donaldson in 1988. The marriage ended in divorce in 2004.
Kingwell is a contributing editor to Harper's Magazine, the literary quarterly Descant, the political monthly This Magazine and the Globe and Mail books section. He was also a drinks columnist for the men's magazine Toro. He was formerly a columnist for the National Post, and a contributing editor of Saturday Night. He frequently appears on television and radio, often on the CBC, and is well known for his appearance in the documentary film The Corporation. He has delivered, among others, the George Grant, Harold Innis, Marx Wartofsky and Larkin-Stuart memorial lectures.
Kingwell’s work has been translated into ten languages, and he lectures to academic and popular audiences around the world. From 2001 to 2004, he was chair of the Institute for Contemporary Culture at the Royal Ontario Museum. His work on philosophy, art, and architecture has appeared in many leading academic journals and magazines, including The Journal of Philosophy, Philosophical Forum, Ethics, Political Theory, and the Yale Journal of Law and the Humanities, the New York Times and The New York Times Magazine, Utne Reader, Adbusters, the Walrus, Harvard Design Magazine,Canadian Art, Azure, Toronto Life, the Globe and Mail, and the National Post.
Kingwell is one of two University of Toronto professors teaching a first year philosophy course entitled Introduction to Philosophy. Kingwell teaches his class in Victoria College's Isabel Bader Theatre, with a class size of around 700 students. He has also been part of the University of Trinity College's TrinityOne program, for which he taught a seminar class entitled Ethics and the Creative Imagination.
He describes himself as a social democrat and a "recovering Catholic". According to the Canadian Who's Who 2006, he also enjoys running, baseball, basketball, jazz, films and pop music. He has two brothers: a younger brother named Sean Kingwell and an older brother named Steven Kingwell.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews
January 1, 2021
In a just world the more recognized and lauded professor to emerge from the academic halls of the University of Toronto would be their professor of Philosophy, Mark Kingwell. He's been writing rigorous and thoughtful books for years, here tackling the notions of risk, especially pertinent during the pandemic dumpster fire of 2020.
Kingwell argues that we are just incredibly bad at assessing our own interests and misreading the baseline facts, distracted by an affinity for narrative construction instead of rigorously assessing available data. Add to that a tragic combination of behaviours fuelled by risk aversion (self-isolation) and risk tolerance (sending kids back to school) and we see the growth of meta-level risks that can create net negative results. These tend to congregate around different populations since, while theoretically neutral, risk is still unequally distributed.
So you see Kingwell is clearly a thoughtful writer thinking through available data and presenting it in all its complicated and nuanced glory. It's not easy reading and is inflected with philosophical tones that can sometimes be a challenge to parse as we have an affinity for narrative construction as he puts it.
And so the world betters knows of the University of Toronto's professor of psychology, Jordan Petersen instead. Throngs understand his brand of reactionary politics and polemical stance against the looming threat of social justice warriors, political correctness and, somehow, his perceived threat of incarceration for refusing to use transgender pronouns. He espouses easy bromides like "Clean your room" to rabid fans that are groomed to want easy soundbites and fist shaking diatribes.
None of that here, just the clear-eyed, if densely worded examination of risk and where we might seek answers. It's worth the effort and you'll feel less dirty after reading.
Kingwell argues that we are just incredibly bad at assessing our own interests and misreading the baseline facts, distracted by an affinity for narrative construction instead of rigorously assessing available data. Add to that a tragic combination of behaviours fuelled by risk aversion (self-isolation) and risk tolerance (sending kids back to school) and we see the growth of meta-level risks that can create net negative results. These tend to congregate around different populations since, while theoretically neutral, risk is still unequally distributed.
So you see Kingwell is clearly a thoughtful writer thinking through available data and presenting it in all its complicated and nuanced glory. It's not easy reading and is inflected with philosophical tones that can sometimes be a challenge to parse as we have an affinity for narrative construction as he puts it.
And so the world betters knows of the University of Toronto's professor of psychology, Jordan Petersen instead. Throngs understand his brand of reactionary politics and polemical stance against the looming threat of social justice warriors, political correctness and, somehow, his perceived threat of incarceration for refusing to use transgender pronouns. He espouses easy bromides like "Clean your room" to rabid fans that are groomed to want easy soundbites and fist shaking diatribes.
None of that here, just the clear-eyed, if densely worded examination of risk and where we might seek answers. It's worth the effort and you'll feel less dirty after reading.
October 10, 2021
Ostensibly a book on risk filtered through the lens of the pandemic, this slim volume felt like it was careening from topic to topic. I finally decided that it wasn't really a book on COVID risk, but was instead a general introduction to how philosophers and societies have approached conceiving of, classifying, and mitigating risks. If I had come to the book with that idea in mind it might have felt like a more coherent introductory survey.
March 4, 2021
On Risk, by Mark Kingwell, is a fascinating book discussing the philosophy of risk, and relating it, in some form, to the modern moment of COVID-19 and human society. Numerous topics are discussed from the perspective of risk and how humans interact with it. Some fascinating discussions ensue on anti-maskers and human logic; how personal risk relates to community risk, or how humans often do not have a unified perspective on the contradictions they inhibit when they consider risk. From a philosophical standpoint, Kinsgwell notes that risk or risk aversion is akin to avoiding death; and that those who avoid risk to a high degree are like "zombies" in the sense that they avoid life to avoid death. An interesting perspective; although he does not go so far as to agree fully with his now notorious colleague, Jordan Peterson (in fact, Kingswell goes quite some way to distance himself from Petersonesque rhetoric). Kingswell looks at risk as a factor of betting, examining some game-theory, as well as the philosophical concept of luck. People are often examining risk as a way to bet against future odds; whether they "take the risk" or "roll the dice" and leap into a new, but insecure profession, or "hold there cards" for a better deal, for example. Risk and politics is also discussed, as is risk in the healthcare industry. Kinsgwell's view on the COVID-19 virus and its responses is interesting. He notes the challenges that health care policy makers face when interacting with a novel virus that changes over time, and is not yet well understood, even at the time of writing (one calendar year after the first lockdown in my locality). He looks at the wider communities muddled response to risk and COVID as well - some people follow directives for many months, but then crack, for example. It's all to avoid being a "zombie", even if the risks are not well considered by those going out. A dinner with the family may seem harmless, and you might even get away with it. But you parents catching COVID and perishing would have a huge detrimental effect on your family, far so more than avoiding the dinner in the first place. Humans lack the ability to make these consistent choices, and Kingswell implies somewhat that this should be accounted for in policy making. Better education in risk as a concept is (and should continue to be) a big part of human learning both in early and later years as well, so that society has a better understanding of how the numbers work, and what avoiding risk means and really looks like on the ground.
At the end of the day, this book did help shift my perspective in numerous ways. It made me think more deeply about the philosophy of risk, not just as a statistical concept, or one tied closely to managing workflow and projects, but one that is daily a part of our mode of thinking, and the decisions we all make everyday. Having a better philosophical gleaning, and how that translates into practical knowledge, and ultimately into what actions we take as individuals, and as communities and nations, is key. Kingswell's book is deeply thoughtful and tied both to humanities shared past, and current moment; he quotes Machiavelli alongside Bill Murray, or Sophocles beside Zadie Smith. This is a well read individual, with a brilliant mind attuned to both history, thought and practicality. I am no philosophy expert; I find some of these concepts difficult to wrap my mind around (no duh, Sherlock, that's the point). Even so, this was a wholly enjoyable, and deeply thoughtful read. Easy recommendation for those looking to read about COVID-19 from a non-conformist perspective, and from the viewpoint of philosophy and our greater moment in time, as opposed to the hundreds and hundreds of bland and shallow perspectives that are going to be flowing out of the publishing houses over the next few years.
At the end of the day, this book did help shift my perspective in numerous ways. It made me think more deeply about the philosophy of risk, not just as a statistical concept, or one tied closely to managing workflow and projects, but one that is daily a part of our mode of thinking, and the decisions we all make everyday. Having a better philosophical gleaning, and how that translates into practical knowledge, and ultimately into what actions we take as individuals, and as communities and nations, is key. Kingswell's book is deeply thoughtful and tied both to humanities shared past, and current moment; he quotes Machiavelli alongside Bill Murray, or Sophocles beside Zadie Smith. This is a well read individual, with a brilliant mind attuned to both history, thought and practicality. I am no philosophy expert; I find some of these concepts difficult to wrap my mind around (no duh, Sherlock, that's the point). Even so, this was a wholly enjoyable, and deeply thoughtful read. Easy recommendation for those looking to read about COVID-19 from a non-conformist perspective, and from the viewpoint of philosophy and our greater moment in time, as opposed to the hundreds and hundreds of bland and shallow perspectives that are going to be flowing out of the publishing houses over the next few years.
September 26, 2025
I have finally acquired all the field notes series and I am starting at the beginning to finish them!
December 7, 2020
Mark Kingwell's "On Risk" successfully runs the balance of requiring some familiarity with the ideas referenced so as to alienate novices, but simultaneously treating those ideas with such brash shallowness as to be unengaging to the cognoscenti. This book manages quite well to be both boorish and pedantic but it truly shines in how unlikeably tiresome Kingwell writes, particularly the constant barrage of cultural references cobbled together as if he was auditioning to write the screenplay of National Treasure 3. "On Risk" is itself a misleading title, as Kingwell spends the entire book essentially getting no further than suggesting risk exists and fails to ever interrogate how we confront it. This book reveals Kingwell as the worst of philosophical tropes; it is replete with useless ramblings without application to our lived experience, and more concerned with appearing knowledgeable about irrelevant trivia than about actually having to think. I feel cheated to have paid money for this.
October 14, 2021
A More Concentrated Focus, Please
I wish this book were more concentrated. It is diffuse. In two paragraphs, Kingwell covers the question of suffering. Then, in a few pages, he blazes through fate, free will, and risk. Another couple of paragraphs, and his critique of neoliberal economics is concluded. Each of these topics, by itself, could have been a book. I almost fell out of my chair at one point when I read: “Marketing and advertising follow in wake of these [e.g. actuarial science and economics], but I lack the space to address them.” Really? If you could cover Foucault in one paragraph, couldn’t you cover marketing and advertising in a few sentences?
I felt that Kingwell attempted to cram too much into this slender volume. I had a hard time following his train of thought as he jumped from Homer Simpson to the question of suffering to theodicy to Covid to politics and so on. The Kirkus review speaks kindly when it says that On Risk is “sometimes meandering.”
Who is the Audience?
The back cover (quoted below) presents this book as a primer for all the people who want to learn more about risk because the pandemic has made risk the “it” word. While much of the book is conversational, parts of it I found hard to follow. Take this explanation of consciousness in the multiverse:
"To be precise [Daniel] Dennett holds to a “multiple drafts” model of consciousness, without a central homuncular observer in the “Cartesian theatre” notion of singular consciousness. This view makes room, therefore, for modular distribution of mindedness."
I felt that, for me to have a chance of understanding any of this, these three sentences would have needed to be expanded into three pages (or more!) of concise writing. It is the same with the Kolmogorov zero-or-one law of probability theory. Kingwell mentions the law that seems to imply there are no odds in between zero (impossible) and one (absolute certainty) but before he explains how it works, he is already onto the next topic. I would have been fascinated to learn more about the Kolmogorov law.
Chance or Risk?
I was confused about how he uses the term risk. Much of the time, when Kingwell refers to risk, I thought he ought to be talking about chance. Take this example. At one point he says that “Risk is theoretically neutral and indifferent.” Is risk neutral and indifferent? If you take a risk, say, by taking a corner at 100kph instead of 40kph or by standing up to a bully, it is not going to be “neutral and indifferent”–something will happen, either in your favour or not. If he had said “Chance is theoretically neutral and indifferent” I would have understood better. Many of his anecdotes I’ve found in books on chance and probability, where they’re classified under chance. Certainly chance and risk overlap, but I found myself thinking “chance” many times when he wrote “risk.” Despite several pages on etymology, I found myself wishing that Kingwell would have clearly defined what he meant by “risk,” a word that can mean many things including danger, the exposure to danger, fate, destiny, and more.
I Learned More About Kingwell than I did on Risk
Reading this book, I learned more about Kingwell’s likes and dislikes than I did on risk. Kingwell likes: Gillian Anderson, liberal thought, Susan Sontag, Jacques Derrida, Paul Krugman, and Stanley Kubrick. Kingwell does not like: George W. Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Donald Trump, Ayn Rand, Kenny Rogers, Napoleon, neo-liberal capitalism, and Midwestern voters. If your tastes line up with his, you may find this book enjoyable. Some of his vitriolic struck me as unnecessary sidetracks that detracted from the points he was making. Take this comment on one of his colleagues at the University of Toronto: “This [e.g. that the university is a privileged environment] is one of the few points on which I agree with the world view of my polemical and lately deranged University of Toronto colleague, Jordan Peterson, who made this very point during a panel discussion on student mental health on which we both appeared.” Kingwell, I thought, could have made his point quite equally well without bringing up Peterson. Elsewhere, Kingwell celebrates “four hundred-plus years of liberal thought” that “has been about creating community through the inclusion of the Other.” In word he celebrates the inclusion of the Other but, in deed, he calls out his colleague for being “deranged” at a symposium on mental health?
If you’re looking for a primer of risk, there are others out there. One of my favourites is Peter L. Bernstein’s Against the Gods: The Remarkable Story of Risk. Bernstein goes into depth and he is a great storyteller. A lighter read on risk would be Chances Are… Adventures in Probability by Michael and Ellen Kaplan. On risk and catastrophe, there is Mark Buchanan’s enjoyable Ubiquity: Why Catastrophes Happen. On simulating risk on the stage of theatre, there is my own The Risk Theatre Model of Tragedy: Gambling, Drama, and the Unexpected. Kingwell’s book, despite its title, really isn’t a primer on risk. It could have been more usefully called On Risk and Social Justice or something along those lines.
Finally, there was, to me, a contradiction within the book. One of Kingwell’s strategies to equalize opportunity in society is by implementing higher taxes, in particular, the estate or inheritance tax. That position itself is not controversial. But on every other page of his book, he lambasts the government. The response of the American government, for example, to the Covid crisis was like flying an airliner straight into the side of a mountain face in plain sight. Presidents of the United States are corrupt, lying, war-mongers. The electorate cannot tell up from down, voting for policies that harm everyone. Government relief programs are inefficient and nepotistic. The question I asked myself as I read his book was: if government is as bad as he claims, how could giving them more money help society?
For full review, click: https://melpomeneswork.com/review-of-...
I wish this book were more concentrated. It is diffuse. In two paragraphs, Kingwell covers the question of suffering. Then, in a few pages, he blazes through fate, free will, and risk. Another couple of paragraphs, and his critique of neoliberal economics is concluded. Each of these topics, by itself, could have been a book. I almost fell out of my chair at one point when I read: “Marketing and advertising follow in wake of these [e.g. actuarial science and economics], but I lack the space to address them.” Really? If you could cover Foucault in one paragraph, couldn’t you cover marketing and advertising in a few sentences?
I felt that Kingwell attempted to cram too much into this slender volume. I had a hard time following his train of thought as he jumped from Homer Simpson to the question of suffering to theodicy to Covid to politics and so on. The Kirkus review speaks kindly when it says that On Risk is “sometimes meandering.”
Who is the Audience?
The back cover (quoted below) presents this book as a primer for all the people who want to learn more about risk because the pandemic has made risk the “it” word. While much of the book is conversational, parts of it I found hard to follow. Take this explanation of consciousness in the multiverse:
"To be precise [Daniel] Dennett holds to a “multiple drafts” model of consciousness, without a central homuncular observer in the “Cartesian theatre” notion of singular consciousness. This view makes room, therefore, for modular distribution of mindedness."
I felt that, for me to have a chance of understanding any of this, these three sentences would have needed to be expanded into three pages (or more!) of concise writing. It is the same with the Kolmogorov zero-or-one law of probability theory. Kingwell mentions the law that seems to imply there are no odds in between zero (impossible) and one (absolute certainty) but before he explains how it works, he is already onto the next topic. I would have been fascinated to learn more about the Kolmogorov law.
Chance or Risk?
I was confused about how he uses the term risk. Much of the time, when Kingwell refers to risk, I thought he ought to be talking about chance. Take this example. At one point he says that “Risk is theoretically neutral and indifferent.” Is risk neutral and indifferent? If you take a risk, say, by taking a corner at 100kph instead of 40kph or by standing up to a bully, it is not going to be “neutral and indifferent”–something will happen, either in your favour or not. If he had said “Chance is theoretically neutral and indifferent” I would have understood better. Many of his anecdotes I’ve found in books on chance and probability, where they’re classified under chance. Certainly chance and risk overlap, but I found myself thinking “chance” many times when he wrote “risk.” Despite several pages on etymology, I found myself wishing that Kingwell would have clearly defined what he meant by “risk,” a word that can mean many things including danger, the exposure to danger, fate, destiny, and more.
I Learned More About Kingwell than I did on Risk
Reading this book, I learned more about Kingwell’s likes and dislikes than I did on risk. Kingwell likes: Gillian Anderson, liberal thought, Susan Sontag, Jacques Derrida, Paul Krugman, and Stanley Kubrick. Kingwell does not like: George W. Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Donald Trump, Ayn Rand, Kenny Rogers, Napoleon, neo-liberal capitalism, and Midwestern voters. If your tastes line up with his, you may find this book enjoyable. Some of his vitriolic struck me as unnecessary sidetracks that detracted from the points he was making. Take this comment on one of his colleagues at the University of Toronto: “This [e.g. that the university is a privileged environment] is one of the few points on which I agree with the world view of my polemical and lately deranged University of Toronto colleague, Jordan Peterson, who made this very point during a panel discussion on student mental health on which we both appeared.” Kingwell, I thought, could have made his point quite equally well without bringing up Peterson. Elsewhere, Kingwell celebrates “four hundred-plus years of liberal thought” that “has been about creating community through the inclusion of the Other.” In word he celebrates the inclusion of the Other but, in deed, he calls out his colleague for being “deranged” at a symposium on mental health?
If you’re looking for a primer of risk, there are others out there. One of my favourites is Peter L. Bernstein’s Against the Gods: The Remarkable Story of Risk. Bernstein goes into depth and he is a great storyteller. A lighter read on risk would be Chances Are… Adventures in Probability by Michael and Ellen Kaplan. On risk and catastrophe, there is Mark Buchanan’s enjoyable Ubiquity: Why Catastrophes Happen. On simulating risk on the stage of theatre, there is my own The Risk Theatre Model of Tragedy: Gambling, Drama, and the Unexpected. Kingwell’s book, despite its title, really isn’t a primer on risk. It could have been more usefully called On Risk and Social Justice or something along those lines.
Finally, there was, to me, a contradiction within the book. One of Kingwell’s strategies to equalize opportunity in society is by implementing higher taxes, in particular, the estate or inheritance tax. That position itself is not controversial. But on every other page of his book, he lambasts the government. The response of the American government, for example, to the Covid crisis was like flying an airliner straight into the side of a mountain face in plain sight. Presidents of the United States are corrupt, lying, war-mongers. The electorate cannot tell up from down, voting for policies that harm everyone. Government relief programs are inefficient and nepotistic. The question I asked myself as I read his book was: if government is as bad as he claims, how could giving them more money help society?
For full review, click: https://melpomeneswork.com/review-of-...
December 13, 2025
Covid-19 has illuminated so many realities about humanity, delusion, and what we know to be true about the world that we'll be pondering over for years to come. Mark Kingwell provides a lot to chew on regarding the risks we take daily, the philosophical issues of life, death, human interaction and living dangerously. I found the parts on the game of risk, and the segments on people taking risks with their own lives regarding not masking, fascinating.
This short book was thoughtfully put together and even though I look at all white male philosophy professors askance nowadays, yes because of that guy, I think Mark Kingwell gave us some work that was easy to follow and insightful. I think he's a particularly astute observer of our times.
This short book was thoughtfully put together and even though I look at all white male philosophy professors askance nowadays, yes because of that guy, I think Mark Kingwell gave us some work that was easy to follow and insightful. I think he's a particularly astute observer of our times.
Read
February 12, 2024Finished this one, but alas not the book I'm looking for. I think my problem was that I was looking to expand on my understanding of risk from a self-help lens with philosophical frameworks of thinking to examine risk, and this was more of an academic philosophical view.
I found the application of the concepts to COVID and the pandemic interesting at first, but then later tiresome, like beating my head over it.
I love a good footnote, but this book had way too many, most of which were novel-length in their own right.
I found the application of the concepts to COVID and the pandemic interesting at first, but then later tiresome, like beating my head over it.
I love a good footnote, but this book had way too many, most of which were novel-length in their own right.
July 3, 2022
Great short overview of the concept of risk and its political implications. Kingwell writes in an extremely accessible way. He draws inspiration from other philosophers as much as commonly known media, and quickly changes between the two. This creates a quick paced read packed with engaging ideas and questions. While the middle of the book meanders to a certain extent, the last chapter is the best of the book and provides a clear set of propositions to better deal with risk at a societal level.
November 9, 2022
I like Mark Kingwell and was looking forward to this book it was totally disjointed and I feel was not even about what the title and description said. In this book the author seems fixated on quoting books, movies and other random articles which often are not relevant and as mentioned leaves the book disjointed. Very disappointed
February 6, 2022
A very intelligent author with an extremely comprehensive spectrum of resources and knowledge to draw upon, but an equally extremely obscured takeaway message. As I finished this I realize I was just listening to a smart dude rant about risk, and that I didn’t really learn anything new.
February 26, 2026
A great book about risk written in part about the pandemic, but largely devoted to the nature of risk and its political implications.
September 17, 2022
Kingwell is a very modern philosopher. He name checks Heidegger, Foucault and Wittgenstein but he also drops references and examples from The Simpsons, Kenny Roger's song "The Gambler" and the film, "Casablanca".
He argues that "risk is always political." In the context of discussing weather risk he quotes a scientist who explains, "hazards emerge from nature, disasters are made in society." The disaster in New Orleans after Katrina is a classic example of that.
Kingwell also points out the effect of the "birth right lottery". He argues that, "where I am born and who I am born to be, is a matter of luck, but luck of an especially far-reaching kind." The risks I have to worry about depend on where I am standing in society.
Another factor which plays into how risk is viewed is the individual risk tolerances people have. Some people are just more willing to take risk than others. This willingness to take risk is not necessarily correlated to wealth.
Kingwell believes that these risk takers are dangerous to society. "Thus we may need to control for, rather than merely assume, the uneven distribution of willingness to take chances". He discusses the possibility that controlling this type of risk taking personality is a "central tenet of any just society."
I think he goes off the rails at that point. First, he ignores the possibility that risk taking is a net good for society. Certainly there is a legitimate argument that, to this point in history, the vast improvement in life expectancy and material quality of life is due to risk takers. Second, a government whose goal is to control the human drive to take risk is a dangerous government. I would not trust philosophy professors with that kind of power.
Towards the end of the book Kingwell argues that we need to stop considering people as individuals. We should think of them as "members of historically disadvantaged groups" which will require "sharp criticism of other formulistic fallacies, such as equality before the law, or the claim that one person gets just one vote."
This is nonsense, dangerous nonsense. The notion that we can improve the lives of the most unfortunate by doing away with equality before the law or one person, one vote is disproven by history. I understand the frustration that leads to those kinds of thoughts but I have no sympathy with giving in to them.
He argues that "risk is always political." In the context of discussing weather risk he quotes a scientist who explains, "hazards emerge from nature, disasters are made in society." The disaster in New Orleans after Katrina is a classic example of that.
Kingwell also points out the effect of the "birth right lottery". He argues that, "where I am born and who I am born to be, is a matter of luck, but luck of an especially far-reaching kind." The risks I have to worry about depend on where I am standing in society.
Another factor which plays into how risk is viewed is the individual risk tolerances people have. Some people are just more willing to take risk than others. This willingness to take risk is not necessarily correlated to wealth.
Kingwell believes that these risk takers are dangerous to society. "Thus we may need to control for, rather than merely assume, the uneven distribution of willingness to take chances". He discusses the possibility that controlling this type of risk taking personality is a "central tenet of any just society."
I think he goes off the rails at that point. First, he ignores the possibility that risk taking is a net good for society. Certainly there is a legitimate argument that, to this point in history, the vast improvement in life expectancy and material quality of life is due to risk takers. Second, a government whose goal is to control the human drive to take risk is a dangerous government. I would not trust philosophy professors with that kind of power.
Towards the end of the book Kingwell argues that we need to stop considering people as individuals. We should think of them as "members of historically disadvantaged groups" which will require "sharp criticism of other formulistic fallacies, such as equality before the law, or the claim that one person gets just one vote."
This is nonsense, dangerous nonsense. The notion that we can improve the lives of the most unfortunate by doing away with equality before the law or one person, one vote is disproven by history. I understand the frustration that leads to those kinds of thoughts but I have no sympathy with giving in to them.
January 15, 2022
Kingwell is a professor of philosophy at the University of Toronto. In this short pocket-sized book, Kingwell examines risk, how society should manage and distribute risk with a focus on the covid-19 era. Right off the bat, the book is not easy reading. One of the reviews on the cover says “Kingwell is well-read, a gifter notice, a lively writer…” and I could not agree more. The footnotes were interesting and I think this might be the only book where I read all the footnotes. Although I learned about risk, luck, and politics of risk I also learned a lot about the author’s likes and dislikes- which frankly made the book a bit more interesting.
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews