About.com Rating



The importance of September 11 and the ensuing responses is undeniable. What they ultimately mean, however, is another matter entirely. One might imagine that the meaning of all these events would be obvious, but that isn?t the case ? opinions diverge greatly about how to even approach the issues, much less about what conclusions to reach.

Summary

Title: The Philosophical Challenge of September 11
Author: edited by Tom Rockmore, Joseph Margolis, Armen T.


Marsoobian
Publisher: Blackwell Publishers
ISBN: 1405108932

Pro:
?  Offers some very interesting philosophical insights on serious political problems

Con:
?  Some pieces are more political than philosophical

Description:
?  Collection of essays by philosophers addressing the challenges posed by modern terrorism
?  Argues that traditional philosophical tools have difficulty coping with current problems
?  Seeks to provide some basis for rethinking and reconsidering what has been going on

 

Book Review

It?s only natural that people would try to make some sense out of the terrorist attacks and America?s military responses. People need to believe that there is order and reason in the world around them, even when events seems to be wildly irrational and out of control. That?s the project behind The Philosophical Challenge of September 11, edited by Tom Rockmore, Joseph Margolis, and Armen T. Marsoobian.

A fundamental problem, which the editors explain early on, is that so many of our categories used to frame and organize political issues seem unequal to the task of dealing with this:

• ?We are no longer certain of our analytical instruments. In the West, modern political philosophy begins with Hobbes?s destructive tendencies of the individuals pitted mercilessly against one another. The continuing tradition is remarkably homogeneous: for example, virtually every political philosopher from Locke to Rawls fastens on the problem of property. Rawls is generally acknowledged to be one of the most important Anglo-American political philosophers of the past century; and yet the new events that command our political reflection seem pointedly unrelated to anything in Rawls?s writing. Political philosophy as we have known it now seems outdated, seems unable to help us in our hour of need.?

Well, perhaps not completely unable to help us out ? otherwise, there wouldn?t be a book to write, would there? The articles in this volume are generally written from a liberal perspective that is critical of America?s responses to the terrorist attacks: the military excursions, the restrictions on civil liberties, and so forth.

This is likely to put off many readers who would otherwise be interested in a serious philosophical engagement with the subject, especially given the tone of the first piece by George Leaman. His criticisms of American foreign policy may all be correct, but I?m not really sure that it is an appropriate lead into a book on philosophy, even political philosophy.

Far more interesting are the themes running through a couple of pieces on how notions about good and evil have influenced America?s reaction to the terrorist attacks. Andrew Norris writes:

• ?War calls for combat, not self-scrutiny; and one does not reason with evil or seek to compromise with it... Evil is not a crime but a sin; its origin is a mystery of theology, not poverty or political oppression, and one fights it; if one is lucky, one destroys it.?

Angelica Nuzzo writes:

• ?As the target of this new type of war, terrorism must be defined as ?absolute evil,? must be located beyond and without all legal jurisdiction, all international order ? indeed, without any order as such.... ?

• ?The Bush administration had to construe 9/11 as uncaused, original evil, because 9/11 had to become the absolute ground of all responses that would follow. This ground could not be presented, in turn, as the effect of a determinate cause that one could investigate, nor could it be the deed of a rational agent who acted from comprehensible motives (albeit wrong or illegitimate ones) and who in consequence could be prosecuted. The definition of evil as the ungrounded original evil is from the outset a form of political expediency.?

• ?Thus, terrorism is construed...as a phenomenon lying outiside and beyond any law ? civil law as well as moral law, international law, the law of peace, as well as the law of war.?

Now this is philosophical engagement with modern terrorism and the reactions it provokes. It?s far superior to what you?ll find in most magazines today; unfortunately it?s also better than much of what is in the book as well. Many of the articles are more political than philosophical ? that?s not inherently bad because they are still good pieces, but I?d rather a book that leaned more towards the philosophical side of political philosophy.