The
New Yorker carries a really chilling profile of the esteemed philosopher (“The
Philosopher of Feelings”). It makes you think, “is this what it takes to
achieve unrivaled success as a thinker and academic?” Also, much recent
research has highlighted how much social judgment depends on proper emotional
response, including gut feeling. So the article left me wondering about
something else – how could someone so hardened, rationalizing, and detached become
the preeminent philosophical authority on human emotion? Or perhaps this is a
symptom in itself? I would be really curious about Prof. Nussbaum’s reaction to
her profile, whatever that might be…
P.S. I keep thinking about this – an extreme, highly "weird" outlier, "monumentally confident" as she formulates universal principles valid for all of humanity? Or is this perhaps – refracted in a non-existing tear drop – the image of most Western social theorizing, despite the obligatory protestations of cultural sensitivity? I guess Prof. Nussbaum deserves all the sympathy she has tried to extend to the less fortunate – looking down from her elevated SES, fabulous apartment, plane windows, etc. In any case, it would be interesting to see some fMRI data for scholars who write about emotions – too bad I can't afford it myself...
P.S. I keep thinking about this – an extreme, highly "weird" outlier, "monumentally confident" as she formulates universal principles valid for all of humanity? Or is this perhaps – refracted in a non-existing tear drop – the image of most Western social theorizing, despite the obligatory protestations of cultural sensitivity? I guess Prof. Nussbaum deserves all the sympathy she has tried to extend to the less fortunate – looking down from her elevated SES, fabulous apartment, plane windows, etc. In any case, it would be interesting to see some fMRI data for scholars who write about emotions – too bad I can't afford it myself...
