This is a fascinating argument in favor of C.D. Broad’s importance as a philosopher! Andrew Chrucky makes a compelling case for Broad’s significance by emphasizing his role as a dialectical system builder and a “default philosopher” for the 20th century. Here’s a breakdown of the main points:
Why Broad is Underappreciated:
- Lack of Fame: Chrucky acknowledges that Broad isn’t widely known, attributing this to factors like the focus on obscure and iconoclastic philosophers in academia.
- “Publish or Perish” Culture: He criticizes the pressure to publish, which often leads to less rigorous work focused on interpreting and critiquing others rather than building original systems.
What Makes Broad Important:
- Dialectical System Building: Broad excels at comprehensively examining all possible philosophical positions on a topic, drawing inspiration from figures like Aristotle, Kant, and Hegel.
- Mastery of
Principia Mathematica: He integrates the advancements of Russell and Whitehead into his dialectical framework, setting him apart from many other philosophers. - “Default Philosopher”: Chrucky introduces this concept to describe a philosopher who provides a comprehensive and clear starting point for philosophical inquiry, much like Aristotle did in his time. Broad’s meticulous analysis and clear writing style make him ideal for this role.
- Clarity and Comprehensiveness: Broad’s work is characterized by its exceptional clarity, precise vocabulary, and thorough examination of alternatives. This makes it invaluable for anyone seeking to engage with the topics he covers.
Broad’s Contributions:
- Mind-Body Problem: Offers a detailed classification of 17 different approaches to the mind-body problem.
- Ethics: Builds upon the work of Henry Sidgwick to provide a sophisticated classification of ethical theories.
- Epistemology: Develops a rationalistic stance with a priori concepts, challenging empiricism.
- Philosophy of Religion: Presents concise yet impactful arguments in the philosophy of religion.
- Induction and Probability: Makes significant contributions to the field of inductive logic, acknowledged by figures like G.H. von Wright.
- Parapsychology: While potentially controversial, Broad’s open-minded approach to parapsychology demonstrates his commitment to exploring all aspects of experience.
Chrucky’s Conclusion:
By presenting Broad as a master dialectician, a synthesizer of previous philosophical advancements, and a writer of exceptional clarity, Chrucky convincingly argues for his position as a “default philosopher” whose work deserves more attention and recognition. He suggests that engaging with Broad’s philosophy can provide a solid foundation for further philosophical inquiry in the 21st century.
My Thoughts:
This is a strong argument for Broad’s importance. It highlights the often-overlooked value of systematic and clear philosophical writing in a field that sometimes prioritizes novelty and obscurity. Chrucky’s emphasis on Broad’s dialectical approach and his ability to synthesize diverse perspectives is particularly compelling. It encourages a re-evaluation of how we assess philosophical importance and calls for a deeper engagement with Broad’s work. Sources and related content
Charlie Dunbar Broad – Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy