The Bernard Williams chat on

The Bernard
Williams
chat on the Guardian wasn’t particularly exciting. Lots of
Williams reminding people that there are things that are objectively true.
Exciting things mostly, like that it is raining outside, or that England hasn’t
won the World Cup since ’66. Actually, he didn’t say the last thing, which
prompted one of the more amusing questions:

Not since Freddy
Ayer has there been a prominent football-supporting philosopher. Karl Miller,
admittedly a mere former UCL English professor – although by all accounts a
bright lad – has kept the flame alive with his “Gazza was like a bronzed God,
resplendent in the Mediterranean sun.” But that old lag Honderich can’t tell
his Liverpool from his liver sausage. Parfit reckons he knows a thing or two
about the continuity of self, but has consistently been fucking terrible on the
flat back four debate. Nussbaum just bursts into tears when she’s asked to
explain the offside ruling; and McGinn thinks we’re all too innately stupid to
understand anything more complicated than darts.

What’s wrong with
philosophers nowadays? Have you no sense of priorities?

Surprisingly enough, Williams did not answer
that question.

Why can’t more American’s ask questions like
that of philosophers? The comment about Nussbaum is horribly unfair of course,
but the McGinn comment is much closer to the target. And can I just remind you
that while it’s not football, Marc Lange did have a very
good paper in the latest Analysis
which revealed a rather subtle
understanding of some important issues in baseball. He may have made some
comments about how this bore on the issue of whether current scientific
theories are true, and including afterthoughts like this shows that he has his
priorities in exactly the right order. So not everywhere do philosophers have
misplaced affections.

The really depressing thing to come out of
the chat is that after doing a survey of the literature, Williams concluded
that there are people who need to be reminded that there are objective truths
like this in the world. Fixing up some belief systems is a rough old job, and I’m
glad he’s trying to do it and not I.

Postscript: in the intro to the chat the
editor described Williams as “this country’s greatest living philosopher”. Huh?
What does this say about the rest of the philosophical scene there? Michael
Dummett’s just an old commie hack? Tim Williamson’s a mere logic-wielding showoff?
I’d probably vote Mike Martin above Williams in terms of great British
philosophers, but I’m probably just being ageist there.