Key Concepts in Philosophy

Paddy McQueen

• Publisher: Bloomsbury Academic
• Year: 2010
• Print ISBN: 9780230231580
• eBook ISBN: 9781350314849
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Study Aids
• Subtopic: Study Guides

An accessible account of philosophical concepts, theories and key thinkers with an emphasis on recent developments in the field. Containing over 300 entries, the terms are ordered alphabetically and cross referenced for ease of use. Suggestions for further reading follow the explanations, encouraging further reflection and independent learning.

Aa

Ad hominem

Ad hominem (against the person) is a type of fallacy (error in reasoning) which occurs when someone directs a personal criticism at an opponent, rather than attacking their argument. For example, we might refer to a person’s appearance, hobbies or reputation as a reason to doubt their argument even though how a person looks or behaves has no bearing on the strength (validity) of their argument. Political debates often contain many examples of the ad hominem fallacy, such as when politicians are criticised for their personal tastes, hair-cut or dress sense. Implicit within such criticisms is the false assumption that these characteristics somehow affect the force of political arguments.

See also: begging the question; fallacy; impartiality; logic; slippery slope argument; straw man; validity; vicious circle

Key question: Can there be any justification for judging the strength of an argument according to a person’s appearance or lifestyle?

Further reading: Engel (1994); Hansen and Pinto (1995); Walton (1989)

Adorno, Theodor W. (1903–1969)

Adorno was an influential figure in the Frankfurt School that was set up to discuss Marxist philosophy. His ideas were influenced by his experiences of the Holocaust, and his studies in philosophy and music. Having left Germany because of the Nazi regime, he and Horkheimer wrote a critique of modernity called the Dialectic of Enlightenment (1947). They argued that, rather than simply serving to free people from fear of the unknown through scientific endeavour and rational thinking, enlightenment also produces irrationality. Within modernity, rationality and irrationality co-exist. Rational progress occurs at the expense of whatever needs to be dominated. For example, the fear of illness has led to attempts to dominate the causes of illness, both in the environment and in people. Sanitation and genetic engineering are examples of such attempts. According to Adorno and Horkheimer, domination requires destruction of whatever is causing fear, and this is promoted by capitalism and technological advances. However, we should not make the straightforward assumption that pre-enlightenment times were bad and post-enlightenment will be radically different and greatly improved. For example, whilst modern science might bring about positive change such as improved health or better forms of communication, it can also deprive the world of meaning.

Adorno is well known in psychology for his work on the authoritarian personality, and in cultural studies for writing about aesthetics. For Adorno, art works are historical and socio-cultural productions that cannot be judged in terms of natural beauty. Art is produced by a dialectic process in which a person’s desire to express their subjectivity (experiences, feelings, desires, and so on) confronts a social reality which represses this subjectivity. Art, then, can be seen as the demand for freedom from repression, as well as an important form of social criticism.

Another important contribution was Adorno’s idea of Negative Dialectics (1966). He criticised ‘identity-thinking’, which is an individual’s attempt to incorporate an object into their conceptual scheme. Rather than making an object conform to our expectations or assumptions about what it is, we should try to see it in its distinctness. This requires us to appreciate it as a genuine ‘other’, something unique and independent of us. This is achieved in part by considering what an object is not. Adorno also expanded on Marx's idea of alienation by emphasising the control of the masses through the media and popular culture.

See also: alienation; aesthetics; dialectic; enlightenment; Frankfurt school; identity; Marxism; modernism; rationalism

Further reading: Adorno (1966, 1970); Horkheimer and Adorno (1947); Jarvis (1998); Jay (1984); O’Connor (2000); http://www.marxists.org/subject/frankfurt-school/index.htm

Aesthetics

The term ‘aesthetics’ originates from the Greek word aisthanomai, which means ‘perception through the senses’. Aesthetics is primarily concerned with the philosophy of art, and the exploration of issues such as our experience and judgement of beauty. Interest in aesthetics dates back to Greek philosophers such as Plato, whose theory of forms led him to claim that art is an imitation of an imitation of reality. However, the development of the term is chiefly associated with Kant’s Critique of Judgement (1790). Kant started by asking what kind of a judgement we make when we say something is beautiful. According to Kant, there are four vital features of our aesthetic judgements. Firstly, the judgements are ‘disinterested’, meaning that we find something pleasurable because we judge it to be beautiful, rather than judging something to be beautiful because we find it pleasurable. Secondly, they are ‘universal’ because, in saying that a thing is beautiful, we demand that others find it beautiful too. When someone disagrees over the beauty of a thing, we try and convince them that they are mistaken. Thirdly, they are ‘necessary’, meaning that we are compelled to make the judgement and to try and compel others to make the same judgement. Fourthly, aesthetic judgements make an object appear ‘purposive without purpose’. This means that a beautiful object appears to us as if it were designed, as if it had some purpose, although no such purpose can be found. According to Kant, aesthetic qualities such as beauty are not properties possessed by an object. Instead, they are a product of the mind, something that we impose upon the object in making an aesthetic judgement.

Aesthetic theories which deny that qualities such as beauty are genuine properties of an object are anti-realist, meaning that those qualities do not exist independently of the mind. The anti-realist, or subjectivist, view of aesthetics is summed up by the phrase ‘beauty is in the eye of the beholder’. The relativist conception of aesthetics is often justified by the variation between different cultures’ judgements of what is considered beautiful, musical, artistic, and so on. By contrast, if one argues that aesthetic qualities are inherent in an object and that we passively perceive them, then one is an aesthetic realist. Plato’s theory is an example of realist aesthetics. He argues that something is made beautiful by possessing the form of beauty. Therefore all beautiful things share the one property – beauty – and we see something as beautiful when we recognise the presence of this form.

Aesthetics is also concerned with establishing what, if anything, makes something a work of art. Many modern artists have explored the boundaries of what constitutes an object of ‘art’ by using everyday ‘non-artistic’ objects in their works or by presenting intentionally unpleasant and unattractive images. Such works include Turner Prize winner Damien Hirst’s cow chopped in half and John Cage's silent orchestral composition. Musical genres, such as jazz and classical, are often seen as ‘truer’ forms of music than modern pop and ‘muzak’, perhaps because they represent more established ideas of what musical works should be like.

See also: Adorno; anti-realism; beauty; constructionism; cultural relativism; Hume; Kant; modernism; Plato; postmodernism; realism; relativism; value

Key questions: Are aesthetic judgements subjective? What is it, if anything, that makes something a work of art?

Further reading: Adorno (1970); Cooper (1992); Hanfling (1992); Kant (1790); Townsend (1997)

Agency

Agency refers to autonomous action. You demonstrate agency by choosing to read this sentence. However, the sense that we are in control of, and make choices about, what we do does not necessarily give us free choice. Therefore agency is not equivalent to free will. Agency includes the idea that we agree with what we are doing or at least agree to do it. A drug addict could be said to be agreeing to take a drug under circumstances of reduced autonomy. The extent to which we are acting autonomously has implications for responsibility, both morally and legally. If our agency is destroyed by addiction, are we legally and morally responsible for taking illegal drugs? Agency might be seen as illusory. For example, Hegel and Marx would view agency as inseparable from social structures because they conceived individuals as being shaped by these structures. Choosing to study, for instance, is a result of a social structure that places value on and reward...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title Page
• Copyright
• Contents
• Acknowledgements
• Introduction
• Notes on the text
• The Key Concepts
• References
• Index