Metaphysics: Knowledge for the Privileged

[Michel]

Maimonides comments on why studies should not begin with metaphysics and why metaphysics should not be taught to the common man:

Fifth Reason.--Man is disturbed in his intellectual occupation by the necessity of looking after the material wants of the body, especially if the
p. 49
necessity of providing for wife and children be superadded: much more so if he seeks superfluities in addition to his ordinary wants, for by custom and bad habits these become a powerful motive. Even the perfect man to whom we have referred, if too busy with these necessary things, much more so if busy with unnecessary things, and filled with a great desire for them-must weaken or altogether lose his desire for study, to which he win apply himself with interruption, lassitude, and want of attention. He will not attain to that for which he is fitted by his abilities, or he will acquire imperfect knowledge, a confused mass of true and false ideas. For these reasons it was proper that the study of Metaphysics should have been exclusively cultivated by privileged persons, and not entrusted to the common people. It is not for the beginner, and he should abstain from it, as the little child has to abstain from taking solid food and from carrying heavy weights.

Guide for the Perplexed: Part I: Chapter XXXIV



Emp is mine.

I'm a formally trained feminist and so it should be no surprise what I'm thinking when I read this. If metaphysical knowledge is limited to the privileged class, that is, those people that can donate sufficient time to study it, then metaphysical knowledge is privileged knowledge. It is privileged knowledge because the privileged are primarily the people who have autonomy from the hardships and demands of the common life. Presuming that such people are divided by social class, then we have exclusive divisions of knowledge for the rich and the non-rich.

[jgweed]

Perhaps at an earlier age, the average man (or woman) did not have the necessary leisure to pursue philosophy, let alone metaphysics, nor did he had the means to build himself a library of philosophers with whom to consult and meditate.

But with the diffusion of knowledge, books, and the increase in spare time, even when the average person is pressed about by life, the situation today seems different. If the desire be there, then anyone with simple time-management skills may devote time to the serious study of philosophy. Far more than at any time, people today have the opportunity to pursue metaphysics to a greater extent than earlier.

On the other hand, Maimonides also seems to make an important observation, namely that a quick and casual knowledge often without the real desire to actually spend a prolonged period of study of philosophy (Sophie's Choice, for example, and little more) cannot lead to the proper study of metaphysics, or indeed of any other complicated subject about which one feels obligated in the modern age to have an opinion about.

One earns the position of "privileged person" in philosophy much as one does in any intellectual endeavor in modern life:desire, dedication, and hard work.

[GoshisDead]

Michel,
What are your views on the Monastic Disciplines in regards to this subject?

[xris]

If philosophy is the study of human nature then by common interest in your fellow man, age can give you a measured view. You need to be able to examine yourself first and by exchange understand others views of themselves. Pure study, if given the opportunity, is a foundation to evaluate opinions from others but not essential. An interest in opinions is the greatest tool and the observation of respected individuals in any field is essential. I am the example of poor or zero education and most of my life has been spent earning a living and not much else. We can aspire and the philosophers here are some of the best in the world and they have a humility that is second to none. Stay here and you will be inspired.

[Michel]

Originally Posted by jgweed

Perhaps at an earlier age, the average man (or woman) did not have the necessary leisure to pursue philosophy, let alone metaphysics, nor did he had the means to build himself a library of philosophers with whom to consult and meditate.

But with the diffusion of knowledge, books, and the increase in spare time, even when the average person is pressed about by life, the situation today seems different. If the desire be there, then anyone with simple time-management skills may devote time to the serious study of philosophy. Far more than at any time, people today have the opportunity to pursue metaphysics to a greater extent than earlier.

On the other hand, Maimonides also seems to make an important observation, namely that a quick and casual knowledge often without the real desire to actually spend a prolonged period of study of philosophy (Sophie's Choice, for example, and little more) cannot lead to the proper study of metaphysics, or indeed of any other complicated subject about which one feels obligated in the modern age to have an opinion about.

One earns the position of "privileged person" in philosophy much as one does in any intellectual endeavor in modern life:desire, dedication, and hard work.

I have no doubt that metaphysics requires intense study and preparatory education if it is to be properly learned. My point is that the demands of metaphysics makes it a knowledge entirely inaccessible to common people because common people must deal with prohibiting social conditions. My scorn is not towards the arcana of metaphysics; my scorn is directed towards the social conditions that prohibit commen people from its study.

The same goes for many other issues or activities to including politics, science, music, activism and so forth. The general person just does not have enough time to tackle these issues because he is burdened with longer work hours, debt, and whatever else that keeps this consumer culture in operation. So, I sincerely disagree with you that common people just need time management. They are systematically burdened, and such burdened is intended because it keeps certain classes in power and other classes out of power. It's not at all a coincidence that in the West, white men dominate politics, religion and philosophy.

Anyhow, since it is usually the "lower" classes that shoulder this burden, it is generally the higher classes or privileged white men that get the opportunity to study higher thought. Thus, it is these classes which the subjects of metaphysics, politics, ethics, etc. is directed, pondered, discussed and taught. That's troubling for me because these men and the higher classes are not at all autonomous from the biases of their subcultures.

There are some great articles online regarding this perspective of mine. If you're interested, google this: feminist epistemology.

---------- Post added 11-13-2009 at 02:53 PM ----------

Originally Posted by GoshisDead

Michel,
What are your views on the Monastic Disciplines in regards to this subject?

I'm unsure what you're asking me.

[GoshisDead]

I'm asking about metaphysical traditions that have alternate class distinctions. Monastic traditions often have self imposed poverty, but command respect due to their association with preist, monk, wise man, shamanistic 'class'. Distinctions of those who have traditionally spent the time to study metaphysics that cannot be placed into the "rich" category.

[Michel]

Originally Posted by GoshisDead

I'm asking about metaphysical traditions that have alternate class distinctions. Monastic traditions often have self imposed poverty, but command respect due to their association with preist, monk, wise man, shamanistic 'class'. Distinctions of those who have traditionally spent the time to study metaphysics that cannot be placed into the "rich" category.

Point granted. But take a look at who supported them. They were not living off of God's grace, I can tell you that! Feminists have long understood that what permits them to do philosophy on a fulltime basis is the burden that others take in their place.

[GoshisDead]

Some supported by the state some supported themselves, either way most of them chose the life, sacrificed material good for another good. On an institutional plane the material femenist argument has merit as it is being adapted to fiscal class, but what of agency in individuals?

[Aedes]

Originally Posted by Michel

my scorn is directed towards the social conditions that prohibit commen people from its study

I have the opposite take on it.

The less privileged you are, the more your attention is devoted to things that are truly important. Family, health, food, making ends meet, love, community, etc, and the philosophy that's important is that which guides one in how to live (i.e. ethics).

Metaphysics is a form of idleness -- it's intentional divestment from the world in front of you. And most people can't afford to be idle.

[Michel]

Originally Posted by GoshisDead

Some supported by the state some supported themselves,

But once they are self-sufficient, then its no longer clear why they have the time to study metaphysics and other people do not. Moreover, it's hard to square that with what Maimonides is saying. He is specifically talking about privileged people and common people.

either way most of them chose the life, sacrificed material good for another good

.

Sure, they might have chosen it. But what's that have to do with anything?

On an institutional plane the material femenist argument has merit as it is being adapted to fiscal class, but what of agency in individuals?

What about it?

---------- Post added 11-13-2009 at 10:42 PM ----------

Originally Posted by Aedes

I have the opposite take on it.

The less privileged you are, the more your attention is devoted to things that are truly important. Family, health, food, making ends meet, love, community, etc, and the philosophy that's important is that which guides one in how to live (i.e. ethics).

Metaphysics is a form of idleness -- it's intentional divestment from the world in front of you. And most people can't afford to be idle.

We disagree. The less privileged you are, the less chance you have at eating properly, making ends meet and effectively contributing to your community. For example, we can see that a proper diet would be increasingly difficult because of a lack of resources to purchase or trade for a proper diet. We can also say that insufficient resources would also impact the medicine you can buy and the doctors you can afford. You seem to glance over this blatantly obvious fact. The problems of making ends meet should not even need argument since it goes hand in hand with being less privileged. Community engagement requires always requires time, and in some cases money and education. These are privileged circumstances because generally people have more primary issues to deal with such like hunger, paying the bills, and so forth.