Mustuse filosoofia

by Olli Lagerspetz, Kati Karja (Translator), Jaan Pärnamäe (Translator)

Olli Lagerspetzi raamat „Mustuse filosoofia“ esitab küsimuse: mis on mustus? Võiks ju ka väita, et mustust ei ole üleüldse olemas, eksisteerib ainult füüsiline aine. Ning ometi mustus ilmselgelt eksisteerib, seda ei saa olematuks selgitada. Mustus kuulub nende väheste põhiviiside hulka, kuidas me keskkonda tajume. Eristus „must“ versus „puhas“ on meie viis kirjeldada füüsiliste asjade väärtust – või pigem näitab see meie teadlikkust väärtustest, mis juba olemas on. Meie suhtumine mustusesse märgib materiaalse reaalsuse loodusteadusliku selgitamise piiratust. Mustuse ja puhtuse mõiste aitavad meil paremini aru saada meie suhetest füüsilise ainega – täielikumalt, kui loodusteadused pakkuda suudavad.

Åbo Akadeemia dotsent Olli Lagerspetz uurib mustust filosoofilisest aspektist, analüüsides seejuures laia ainestikku: Vana Testamenti, ajaloolisi reisikirjeldusi, antropoloogia, sotsioloogia ja loodusteaduste klassikuid ning prantsuse nüüdisfilosoofiat, seega pattulangemisest kuni tänapäevani.

Genres: Philosophy, Anthropology, Nonfiction

444 pages, Paperback

Published January 1, 2020

Reviews

[Helene Uppin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Pole just kiire lugemine, aga mõtlemis- ja silmaringiainet pakub küllaga. Oli huvitav näha mustuse käsitlust, mis pole otseselt ei hügieenist lähtuv ega ka paduantropoloogiline. Kuigi suuremaid ahhaa-elamusi pakkusid mingid nüansid - nt vee- ja korrapõhise puhtuse vastandamine aitas aru saada, miks parukate puuderdamine võis tunduda 300 a tagasi täiesti legit *puhtus*, aga vannis käimine ebavajalik või isegi rõve. Endisaegsete elamisviiside suhtes pisut ajaloolist empaatiat kulub muidugi alati ära, pole ju ajalugu mingi mõtestatud arengumars, pigem ikka nartsissistlik sihitu ringiratast tammumine. Endisaegsed mõtlemisviisid on aga vist meie teadvusesse sügavalt juurdnud ja elavad nn teadusliku maailmapildi all oma värvikat elu. Ilmselt pean kunagi uuesti lugeda, et sellest teadusfilosoofilisest poolest päriselt aru saada.

[Tommi · Rating 4 out of 5]

Whether A Philosophy of Dirt revolutionized my understanding of dirt is something I’m not sure about yet, but this was certainly an enjoyable book on the subject matter: such a comprehensive perusal from several (philosophical) angles. I appreciated his inclusion of many female scholars, such as Martha Nussbaum (“‘The Secret Sewers of Vice’: Disgust, Bodies, and the Law”), Mary Douglas (Purity and Danger) and Julia Kristeva (Powers of Horror), whose work he discusses in detail and hence also managing to whet my appetite to read all of them! The book could use a proper concluding chapter, though. Lagerspetz is a bit tangential at times (who philosopher isn’t?) so some kind of a wrap-up could’ve been useful. The physical book itself is a thing of beauty, the layout well formatted – a great experience overall.

[Oguz Albayrak · Rating 5 out of 5]

It was brilliant!
The book starts with ontological analysis of what is dirt, and investigates every concept that we use in our lives for which dirt could be used as a metaphor.
The connections that are made between cleanliness, tidyness, heterogenity, homogenity, public order, racism was remarkable.
Also it was really interesting that how dirt concept is one of the fundamentals of every human society but yet it was investigated very little philosophically
Then as the second part, it investigates the historical philosophical background.
It was a very structured and well designed book, with a simple language

[Ian Jest · Rating 4 out of 5]

well written, engaging read drawing together a lot of different ideas about cleanliness and dirtiness.

at times he gets too caught up explaining why other writers are wrong, which i found smug, uninteresting, and occasionally felt in bad faith.

e.g. one tack he takes to dismantle other's arguments is their equivocation of terms (clean/pure). but he engages in the same equivocation when for example he equivocates his "dirt" with Kristeva's "abject". Kristeva is not talking about raspberry jam on a white shirt. Her abject is something quite specific which is related to but not the same as his idea of dirt.

[Piret Peensoo · Rating 5 out of 5]

Põhjalik analüüs, mis on samas nii nauditavalt ja kohati vägagi humoorikalt kirja pandud, et suur rõõm oli seda lugeda.

"Üks näeb koristamata tuba, teine aga tuba, kus /elatakse/. See seletab ilmselt ka asjaolu, miks peetakse koristusmaaniat eluvaenulikuks. Koristusmaania tähendab, et kodumajapidamisest tahetakse kõrvaldada pooleliolevate tegevuste märgid. Elu loomulikke tunnusmärke pannakse pahaks kui mustust ja korralagedust." (lk 335)

/kursiivis/

[Anna · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was an intriguing book relevant to my current research interests. The book starts strong with its overview of philosophical perspectives on dirt/filth/soiling, but then wanders about all sorts of other topics without any clear destiny. This meandering approach was not unpleasurable, but it was less useful than I had hoped after reading the first few chapters.

[r · Rating 5 out of 5]

“What is pure is clean, spotless, unsoiled. Pure water is unmixed water, water that is nothing but water. Note that such water is actually dead, a fact that says a lot about life and about a certain nostalgia for purity. Whatever lives also soils, and all that cleans kills.”