This week's Catholic Herald carries an abridged version of Elizabeth Anscombe's classic essay on Humanae Vitae, given as a paper at the University of Melbourne in 1978. (Cf. Defending a virtue under fire)
The full text of the paper is included in the newly published collection of essays by GEM Anscombe on religion, philosophy and ethics: "Faith in a Hard Ground" (edited by Mary Geach and Luke Gormally.) The preface by Luke Gormally and the Introduction by Mary Geach are most helpful, as are the additional footnotes supplied by them
I well remember from my days as an undergraduate philosopher at Oxford the excitement of being able to support essays with material from a Catholic philosopher who was so well versed in the British analytical tradition. The essays in this collection are written at a variety of levels and cover a wide area of ground - from "Hume on Miracles", to contraception, the embryo, to the fundamental question "What is it to believe someone?"
The encouragement (and polite, but ruthless dissection) of independent thought, characteristic of the teaching of philosophy in Britain makes for very thought-provoking writing and Anscombe was a classic exponent of this tradition whilst remaining humble in her acceptance of the Church's magisterium and obedient even when this cost her much soul-searching. I heartily recommend this collection to philosophy undergraduates who are in search of some relief from the secular consensus, to those trained in continental schools who will find these essays refreshing in their originality, and to anyone who has an interest in thinking through the important philosophical and ethical problems of our day.
9 comments:
Ech... Some undergraduate philosopher thinks, can she read such book in English, and is it covenient to buy it with shipping abroad... Thank you, father.
I've just returned from Princeton University where, with John Haldane of St Andrews and other philosophy colleagues from the US, I was involved in running a 5-day philosophy seminar for graduate students on the work of Elizabeth Anscombe, covering in particular her work on morality, on human action and the soul, and on authority and the state.
Many, though not all, of the students were Catholic. They were all doing postgraduate work at leading US and UK universities (from my own university, London, as well as from Chicago, Princeton, Pittsburgh, UCLA, Oxford, Cambridge, Notre Dame, Harvard, Berkeley, Austin at Texas, amongst others).
Anscombe's work on moral theory, and especially her defence of Humanae Vitae, has made her an heroic figure for many of today's Catholic university students. I met the student founder of the Anscombe Society at Princeton - a society which exists to defend ethical values in student life, especially the value of chastity. (She and other student allies were being interviewed on CNN at the time, along with Robert George, a leading Princeton law professor and supporter of our seminar.) Other Anscombe Societies are also being set up by students at Harvard and at other US universities.
I was incredibly impressed by the ability and commitment of all the students. It was clear from talking to the Catholics that many of their generation in the faith are deeply committed to the natural law principles that govern marriage, and to Anscombe's project of defending and deepening our understanding of those principles. Humanae Vitae is regarded as a central text on this topic. These students, remember, are not only Catholics, but among the best philosophy graduates of their generation. One has just won a major prize at Princeton for a postgraduate thesis arguing for the immorality of sex outside marriage - not an easy feat to bring off at any liberal Ivy League University nowadays.
It is not just the liturgical tradition of the Church that is currently being recovered among young people. The intellectual tradition of the Church is being recovered too. Any Catholic, indeed any reasonable person - not all the students at the seminar were Catholic, remember - should do what these students are doing; and read and think about what Elizabeth Anscombe had to say on these topics.
Many thanks, Tom, for that most encouraging report.
Ekurlowa - You could order it from teh UK Amazon and get it shipped to Russia (you would have to sign up for an account.)
Ekurlowa, it looks as though it might be cheaper to get it from amazon.de than from amazon.co.uk (depending on the exchange rates ...), but you might find it useful to have a look at some of the material available online before deciding whether this is something you should be spending time and money on:
http://www.secondspring.co.uk/articles/anscombe.htm
http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles/AnscombeChastity.shtml
http://www.anthonyflood.com/anscombetrumansdegree.htm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/womanshour/05_11_01/tuesday/info3.shtml
How does British philosophy differ from continental philosophy?
Discuss. :-)
In Britain, philosophy at universities tends to be less systematic but encourages independent and original thought - not always leading to good results.
In Europe there is a greater tradition of magisterial teaching, with a systematic approach but less encouragement for independent and original thought.
This is, of course a wild generalisation and there are likely to be many exceptions.
Nice essay question - I'll see if I can have a stab at answering it.
British philosophy has a tradition of concentrating on tinkering with words and meanings in a logically rigorous fashion; it tends to be very dry, but can also seem frivolous (or plain silly) by its reluctance to engage with "life" rather than language and logic.
Continental philosophy is about wrestling with Big Questions, and its besetting vice is the opposite of dryness: impenetrable waffle (either bombastic, in the style of Heidegger, or "playful", in the manner of Derrida - both ultimately going back to Nietzsche).
There are a number of philosophers (Anscombe among them) who manage to avoid the pitfalls of both traditions, and can bring clear language and sound logic to bear on Big Questions, without being dry or obscure or frivolous or impenetrable. Happily, many of them are Catholic - I think it has something to do with serious engagement with Aquinas.
Oh well, that's put off this afternoon's work for another ten minutes.
Thank you. It seems, that I have an amazon.com account.
To follow up on the previous: Fr Tim describes differences in teaching style, my remarks are based on a familiarity with philosophy derived almost entirely from the printed page.
Post a Comment