Answers for Aristotle: How Science and Philosophy Can Lead Us to a More Meaningful Life

Sci-Phi With Professor Massimo Pigliucci

Philosophy, or the love of wisdom traditionally is regarded as a manner of exploring broad, difficult questions about the nature of life, thinking, and ethics. Part of philosophical thinking is determining whether and how this can be done. In his new book, "Answers for Aristotle: How Science and Philosophy can Lead us to a More Meaningful Life" Professor Massimo Pigliucci, develops tentative approaches and tentative answers to philosophical questions through an approach he calls "Sci-Phi" -- a combination of the best of science and philosophy. Pigliucci is Professor of Philosophy at the City University of New York. He holds three PhD's in genetics, biology, and philosophy of science. He puts his formidable learning and intellect to work in informing science with philosophy, and the other way around. This was my first exposure to Pigliucci's work. He is a prolific writer and editor who has partaken in many controversies and debates surrounding the theory of evolution in particular and who maintains an active presence on the web explaining his scientifically influenced, secular philosophizing.

"Answers for Aristotle" is an engagingly written, sweeping introductory account of how science and philosophy together can provide guidance to understanding and to living a rewarding, meaningful life. Pigliucci sees the Greek philosopher Aristotle as the first thinker who attempted to integrate the science of his day with philosophy. As both science and philosophy developed, they diverged. Pigliucci wants to bring them together. Aristotle is also a dominant philosophical influence, particularly in ethics. Aristotle found that the good life consisted in a state and activity he called eudamonia, or human flourishing. Pigliucci agrees and expands upon Aristotle's account.

Both "science" and "philosophy" are difficult to define precisely. In the book's important opening chapter, Pigliucci emphasizes the tentative, empirical character of science, while describing it as "a form of inquiry into the natural world characterized by the continuous refinement of theories that are in one way or another empirically verifiable." It is more difficult to get a working definition of philosophy. Pigliucci offers a thin definition of the discipline as "the construction (and deconstruction) of reasoned arguments". In "Sci-Phi", for Pigliucci, science offers tentative teachings about facts while philosophy explores the importance of scientific teachings to human ends through thought and argument. Science itself cannot answer questions of value or meaning, Pigliucci argues, without running afoul of the "naturalistic fallacy" as developed by the philosopher David Hume.

Aristotle and Hume greatly influence Pigliucci's philosophical approaches. He draws as well from Wittgenstein, the American political philosopher John Rawls, and from Plato, particularly the early dialogue "Euthyphro". The scientific references in the book are broad, large and contemporary, ranging from string theory and quantum physics through genetics, psychology and the social sciences.

The book deals with large, complex questions in a peppery, engaging way. In successive chapters, Pigliucci deals with ethics, "How do we Tell Right from Wrong", epistemology, the nature of the self and of will and reason, love and friendship, political theory, and the existence and claimed relevance of God or gods to a valuable human life. Typically, the chapters begin with anecdotal material and work through papers in the scientific literature that Pigliucci finds valuable. Pigliucci discusses various traditional philosophical approaches and assesses them in light, in part, of what he learns provisionally from science. In general, his approach is what the philosopher William James would describe as "tough minded". Pigliuucci's ethics and politics tend towards the liberal and his metaphysics and epistemology are unabashedly secular.

As Pigliucci says of himself, he is a philosopher who enjoys arguing (not all do) and the book has a contentious, provocative tone. He is commendably serious about jarring his readers and encouraging them to think. For all the emphasis of reason and fact, Pigliucci displays a passionate, emotional devotion to his own purpose in life of educating and promoting thought.

The book is short and quick for the many questions with which it deals. It is entertaining and valuable regardless of whether particular philosophical positions convince the reader. For example, in a chapter titled "Intuition Versus Rationality, and How to become Really Good at What you Do", Pigliucci offers solid, straightforward, and non-trivial advice about improving one's understanding and skills in whatever tasks one sets out to do, whether a job, study, playing chess, or becoming proficient on a musical instrument. I found this valuable psychologically and pedagogically, irrespective of one's philosophical commitments.

Although much of Pigliucci's discussion of religion is alternatively either too quick or too burdensomely factually detailed, his discussion of the "Euthyphro" and the problems it clearly poses about religion and ethics is insightful and keen. It brought back to me the discussion of this dialogue in my first philosophy class almost 50 years ago. Revisiting the "Euthyphro" with Pigliucci was liberating and fresh. The book also brought similar memories of studying Hume's "Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion" and of one of my early teachers who took an approach towards science and philosophy that reminded me of Pigliucci's.

Pigliucci's book will probably have greatest appeal to new philosophical readers. As good writing frequently does, it stimulates thought more than answers questions. I was challenged and delighted with the book. It brought back to me the philosophical studies I began many years ago and the questions that I continue to find important and endlessly fascinating.

Robin Friedman