Revision as of 21:49, 14 May 2006 editPtmccain (talk | contribs)1,273 edits lack of citation← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 21:57, 26 December 2024 edit undoGraham11 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers29,031 editsNo edit summary | ||
(670 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{short description|English moral philosopher (1929–2003)}} | |||
{{Infobox_Philosopher | | |||
{{Other people}} | |||
<!-- Scroll down to edit this page --> | |||
{{EngvarB|date=August 2014}} | |||
<!-- Philosopher Category --> | |||
{{Use dmy dates|date=April 2023}} | |||
region = Western Philosophy | | |||
{{Infobox philosopher | |||
era = ], | | |||
|region = ] | |||
|era = ] | |||
|name = Bernard Williams | |||
|image = BernardWilliams.jpg | |||
|birth_name=Bernard Arthur Owen Williams | |||
|birth_date = {{birth date|df=yes|1929|09|21}} | |||
|birth_place = ], England | |||
|death_date = {{death date and age|df=yes|2003|06|10|1929|09|21}} | |||
|death_place = ], Italy | |||
|education = ] | |||
|spouse = {{ubl|{{marriage|]|1955|1974|end=div}}|{{marriage|Patricia Law Skinner<br>|1974}}}} | |||
|school_tradition = ], ] | |||
|main_interests = ] | |||
|notable_ideas = ], ], ] | |||
|institutions = {{hlist|]|]|]|]|]|]|]}} | |||
|academic_advisors = ] | |||
|notable_students = ], Tim Mulgan, ], ] | |||
|honorific_prefix = ] | |||
|honorific_suffix = {{post-nominals|country=GBR|FBA|size=100%}} | |||
}} | |||
'''Sir Bernard Arthur Owen Williams''' {{post-nominals|country=GBR|FBA}} (21 September 1929 – 10 June 2003) was an English ]. His publications include ''Problems of the Self'' (1973), ''Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy'' (1985), ''Shame and Necessity'' (1993), and ''Truth and Truthfulness'' (2002). He was knighted in 1999. | |||
As ] at the ] and Deutsch Professor of Philosophy at the ], Williams became known for his efforts to reorient the study of moral philosophy to psychology, history, and in particular to the ].<ref name=Jenkins2014p3>Mark P. Jenkins, ''Bernard Williams'', Abingdon: Routledge, 2014 , 3.</ref><ref name=Koopman>Colin Koopman, "Bernard Williams on Philosophy's Need for History," ''The Review of Metaphysics'', 64(1), September 2010, 3–30. {{JSTOR|29765339}}</ref> Described by ] as an "] with the soul of a general ],"<ref name="NYbooks1">{{Cite news |last=McGinn |first=Colin |date=10 April 2003 |title=Isn't It the Truth? |url=https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2003/04/10/isnt-it-the-truth/ |archive-url=https://archive.today/20210508221534/https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2003/04/10/isnt-it-the-truth/ |archive-date=8 May 2021 |access-date=2024-02-03 |work=] |language=en |issn=0028-7504}}</ref> he was sceptical about attempts to create a foundation for moral philosophy. ] wrote that he demanded of philosophy that it "come to terms with, and contain, the difficulty and complexity of human life."<ref name=Nussbaum2009p213>Martha C. Nussbaum, "Tragedies, hope, justice," in Daniel Callcut (ed.), ''Reading Bernard Williams'', Abingdon: Routledge, 2009, 213.</ref> | |||
<!-- Image and Caption --> | |||
subject_name = Bernard Williams | | |||
image_name = BernardWilliams.jpg | | |||
image_caption = Bernard Williams| | |||
<!-- Information --> | |||
name = Bernard Williams| | |||
birth = ], ] | | |||
dead=dead | | |||
death = ], ] | | |||
school_tradition = ] | | |||
main_interests = ]| | |||
influences = ], ]| | |||
influenced = ], ]| | |||
}} | |||
:''For other persons named Bernard Williams, see ].'' | |||
Williams was a strong supporter of women in academia; according to Nussbaum, he was "as close to being a feminist as a powerful man of his generation could be."<ref name=Nussbaum2003>Martha C. Nussbaum, {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20041208185831/http://bostonreview.net/BR28.5/nussbaum.html |date=8 December 2004 }}, ''Boston Review'', October/November 2003.</ref> He was also famously sharp in conversation. ], one of Williams's mentors at Oxford, said that he "understands what you're going to say better than you understand it yourself, and sees all the possible objections to it, and all the possible answers to all the possible objections, before you've got to the end of your own sentence."<ref>{{Cite book |last=Magee |first=Bryan |url=http://archive.org/details/confessionsofphi0000mage |title=Confessions of a philosopher |date=1998 |publisher=London : Phoenix |others=Internet Archive |isbn=978-0-7538-0471-1 |pages=104 |author-link=Bryan Magee |url-access=registration |via=]}}</ref> | |||
==Life== | |||
Sir '''Bernard Arthur Owen Williams''' (], ] – ], ]) was an ] ], noted by '']'' as the "most brilliant and most important British moral philosopher of his time." <ref name=Times1>Obituary, "Professor Sir Bernard Williams," ''The Times'', June 14, 2003</ref> | |||
===Early life and education=== | |||
], ], Essex]] | |||
{{quote box | |||
|border=1px | |||
|quote=The young Bernard was in perpetual intellectual motion, like a dragonfly hovering above a sea of ideas. Everyone he encountered, every event that occurred were material for his insight and his wit.<ref name=SWilliams2009p90>Shirley Williams, ''Climbing the Bookshelves'', London: Virago, 2009, 90.</ref> | |||
|fontsize=98% | |||
|bgcolor=#F9F9F9 | |||
|width=225px | |||
|align=right | |||
|salign=center | |||
|style=margin–top:1.5em;margin-bottom:1.5em;padding:2.0em | |||
|source= — ], 2009<ref>Shirley Williams 2009, 115.</ref>}} | |||
Williams was born in ], a suburb of ], Essex, to Hilda Amy Williams, née Day, a personal assistant, and Owen Pasley Denny Williams, chief maintenance surveyor for the ].<ref name=NYT2003>Christopher Lehmann-Haupt, , ''The New York Times'', 14 June 2003.</ref><ref>, 10 June 1961, 4157.</ref> He was educated at ], an independent school, where he first discovered philosophy.<ref name=Jeffries30Nov2002>Stuart Jeffries, , ''The Guardian'', 30 November 2002.</ref><ref name=Williams2009/> Reading ] led him to ethics and the problems of the self.<ref name="Davies1996">{{Cite web |last=John |first=Davies |date=1996-11-01 |title=A fugitive from the pigeonhole |url=https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/a-fugitive-from-the-pigeonhole/91157.article |access-date=2024-02-04 |website=] (THE) |language=en}}</ref> In his first book, ''Morality: An Introduction to Ethics'' (1972), he quoted with approval Lawrence's advice to "ind your deepest impulse, and follow that."<ref name=Williams1972p79>Bernard Williams, ''Morality: An Introduction to Ethics'', Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972, 79.</ref> | |||
Awarded a scholarship to ], Williams read ] (pure Classics followed by Ancient History and philosophy) at ]. Among his influences at Oxford were W. S. Watt, ], ], ], ], ], ] and ].<ref name=ODNB>A. W. Moore, , ''Oxford Dictionary of National Biography'', January 2007.</ref> He shone in the first part of the course, the pure classics (being particularly fond of writing Latin verses in the style of ]) and graduated in 1951 with a congratulatory ] in the second part of the course and a prize fellowship at ].<ref name="Williams2009">Bernard Williams, "A Mistrustful Animal: A Conversation with Bernard Williams," ''Harvard Review'' 12.1: 2004. Reprinted in Alex Voorhoeve (ed.), ''Conversations on Ethics'', Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009, .</ref><ref name="Times14June2003">{{Cite web |date=2011-05-13 |title=Professor Sir Bernard Williams |url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/obituaries/article1141892.ece |access-date=2024-02-03 |website=]|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110513235039/http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/obituaries/article1141892.ece |archive-date=13 May 2011 }}</ref> | |||
Williams spent over 50 years seeking answers to one question: ''What does it mean to live well?'' This was a question few analytic philosophers had explored, preferring instead to focus on the issue of ]. For Williams, moral obligation, insofar as the phrase had any meaning, had to be compatible with the pursuit of ] and the good life. | |||
After Oxford, Williams spent his two-year ] flying ]s in Canada for the ]. While on leave in New York, he became close to ] (born 1930), daughter of the novelist ] and the political scientist ].<ref name=Jeffries30Nov2002/> They had already been friends at Oxford. Catlin had moved to New York to study economics at ] on a ].<ref name=SWilliams2009p90/> | |||
As Knightbridge Professor of Philosophy at the ] for over a decade, and the Provost of ] for almost as long, {{fact}} Williams became known internationally for his attempt to return the study of moral philosophy to its foundations: to history and culture, politics and psychology, and, in particular, to the Greeks. Described as an "] with the soul of a ]," <ref name=NYbooks1>McGinn, Colin, ''The New York Review of Books'', April 10, 2003.</ref> he saw himself as a ], drawing together ideas from fields that seemed increasingly unable to communicate effectively with one another. He rejected scientific and ] ], once calling reductionists "the ones I really do dislike" because they are morally unimaginative, he said. <ref name=SF>Baker, Kenneth, , an interview with Bernard Williams, ''San Francisco Chronicle'', September 22, 2002.</ref> For Williams, complexity was ], meaningful, and irreducible. | |||
Williams returned to England to take up his fellowship at All Souls and in 1954 became a fellow at ], a position he held until 1959.<ref name=Cal> | |||
He became known as a great supporter of women in ], seeing in women the possibility of that synthesis of ] and ] that he felt eluded analytic philosophy. The American philosopher ] said Williams was "as close to being a ] as a powerful man of his generation could be." <ref name=Nussbaum>Nussbaum, Martha, , ''Boston Review'', October/November 2003</ref> | |||
Alan Code, Samuel Scheffler, Barry Stroud, {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150416205626/http://senate.universityofcalifornia.edu/inmemoriam/bernardaowilliams.htm |date=16 April 2015 }} , University of California. | |||
</ref> He and Catlin continued seeing each other. She began working for the ''Daily Mirror'' and sought election as a Labour MP. Williams, also a member of the Labour Party, helped her with the ] in ] in which she was an unsuccessful candidate.<ref>Shirley Williams 2009, 104, 114.</ref><ref name=ODNB/> | |||
===First marriage, London=== | |||
==His life== | |||
], née Catlin, 2011]] | |||
Williams was born in ], ], the only son of a civil servant. He was educated at ] and read Greats (Classics) at ]. After graduating in 1951 with the rare distinction of a congratulatory first-class honours degree, the highest award at this level in the British university system, he spent his year-long ] in the ] (RAF), flying ] in ]. | |||
Bernard Williams and Shirley Catlin were married in London in July 1955 at ], near ], followed by a honeymoon in ], Greece.<ref>Shirley Williams 2009, 116–117.</ref> | |||
The couple moved into a very basic ground-floor apartment in London, on ], ]. Given how hard it was to find decent housing, they decided instead to share with Helge Rubinstein and her husband, the literary agent ], who at the time was working for his uncle, ]. In 1955 the four of them bought a four-storey, seven-bedroom house in ], ], for £6,800, a home they lived in together for 14 years.<ref>Shirley Williams 2009, 120, 136, 154.</ref> Williams described it as one of the happiest periods of his life.<ref name=Jeffries30Nov2002/> | |||
He met his future wife, ], the daughter of political scientist and philosopher ] and novelist ], while he was on leave in ], where she was studying at ]. At the age of 22, after winning a Prize Fellowship at ], Williams returned to England with Shirley to take up the post — though not before she'd had an affair with four-minute-miler ] — and they were married in 1955. ], as she became known, was elected as a ] ], then crossed the floor as one of the "]" to become a founding member of the ], a centrist breakaway party. She was later ennobled, becoming Baroness Williams of Crosby, and remains a prominent member of the ]. | |||
In 1958, Williams spent a term teaching at the ] in ]. When he returned to England in 1959, he was appointed lecturer in philosophy at ].<ref>Shirley Williams 2009, 132.</ref> In 1961, after four miscarriages in four years, Shirley Williams gave birth to their daughter, Rebecca.<ref>Shirley Williams, ''God and Caesar: Personal Reflections on Politics and Religion'', A&C Black, 2004, 17; Shirley Williams 2009, 132, 139.</ref> | |||
Williams left Oxford to accommodate his wife's rising political ambitions, finding a post first at ] and then at ], while his wife worked as a journalist for the '']''. For 17 years, the couple lived in a large house in ] with the literary agent Hilary Rubinstein and his wife. During this time, described by Williams as one of the happiest of his life, the marriage produced a daughter, Rebecca, but the development of his wife's political career kept the couple apart, and the marked difference in their personal values — Williams was a confirmed ], his wife a devout ] — placed a strain on their relationship, which reached breaking point when Williams had an affair with Patricia Law Skinner, then wife of the historian ]. The Williams' marriage was dissolved in 1974, and Williams and Skinner were able to wed, a marriage that produced two sons. | |||
Williams was a visiting professor at ] in 1963,<ref name=ODNB/> and was appointed Professor of Philosophy at ], London, in 1964. His wife was elected to parliament that year as the Labour member for ] in Hertfordshire.<ref>Shirley Williams 2009, 143, 155.</ref> ''The Sunday Times'' described the couple two years later as "the New Left at its most able, most generous, and sometimes most eccentric." Andy Beckett wrote that they "entertained refugees from eastern Europe and politicians from Africa, and drank sherry in noteworthy quantities."<ref name=Beckett2005>Andy Beckett, , ''The Guardian'', 2 April 2005.</ref> Shirley Williams became a junior minister and, in 1971, ]. Several newspapers saw her as a future prime minister.<ref>Maya Oppenheim, , ''The Independent'', 11 February 2016.</ref> She went on to co-found a new centrist party in 1981, the ]; Williams left the Labour Party to join the SDP, although he later returned to Labour.<ref name=ODNB/> | |||
]. ]] | |||
Williams became Knightbridge Professor of Moral Philosophy at Cambridge in 1967, then served as ] of ] from 1979 until 1987, when he moved to the ] to take up the post of Sather Professor of ], because, he told a British newspaper, he could barely afford to buy a house in central London on his salary as an ]. His public outburst at the low salaries in British universities made his departure appear part of the ], as the British media called it, which was his intention. He told ''The Guardian'' in November 2002: | |||
===Cambridge, second marriage=== | |||
<blockquote>I now regret my departure was so public. I was persuaded that there was a real problem about academic conditions and that if my departure was publicised this would bring these matters to public attention. It did a bit, but it made me seem narky, and when I came back again in three years it looked rather absurd. I came back for personal reasons — it's harder to live out there with a family than I supposed. </blockquote> | |||
], eight of them as provost.]] | |||
In 1967, at the age of 38, Williams became the ] at the ] and a fellow of ].<ref name=Cal/> | |||
According to Jane O'Grady, Williams was central to the decision by King's in 1972 to admit women, one of the first three all-male Oxbridge undergraduate colleges to do so.<ref name=OGrady>Jane O'Grady, , ''The Guardian'', 13 June 2003.</ref> In both his first and second marriages, he supported his wives in their careers and helped with the children more than was common for men at the time.<ref name=Nussbaum2003/> In the 1970s, when Nussbaum's thesis supervisor, ], was harassing female students, and she decided nevertheless to support him, Williams told her, during a walk along ] at Cambridge: "ou know, there is a price you are paying for this support and encouragement. Your dignity is being held hostage. You really don't have to put up with this."<ref>Martha C. Nussbaum, "'Don't smile so much': Philosophy and Women in the 1970s," in Linda Martín Alcoff (ed.), ''Singing in the Fire: Stories of Women in Philosophy'', Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2003 (93–108), 100.</ref> | |||
He returned to England in 1990 to become ] at Oxford, a post he held until 1996, when he was appointed Deutsch Professor of Philosophy at Berkeley, where he remained until his death. | |||
Shirley Williams's political career (the House of Commons regularly sat until 10 pm) meant that the couple spent a lot of time apart. They bought a house in ], Hertfordshire, near the border with south Cambridgeshire, while she lived in Phillimore Place during the week to be close to the Houses of Parliament. Sunday was often the only day they were together.<ref name=SWilliams2009p156>Shirley Williams 2009, 156–157.</ref><ref>, ''Hertfordshire Life'', 13 January 2010.</ref> The differences in their personal values – he was an atheist, she a Catholic – placed a further strain on their relationship.{{refn|group=n|], 2002: "Ours was a very alive marriage, but there was something of a strain that comes from two things. One is that we were both too caught up in what we were respectively doing – we didn't spend all that much time together; the other, to be completely honest, is that I'm fairly unjudgmental and I found Bernard's capacity for pretty sharp putting-down of people he thought were stupid unacceptable. ... He can be very painful sometimes. He can eviscerate somebody. Those who are left behind are, as it were, dead personalities."<ref name=Jeffries30Nov2002/>}} It reached breaking point in 1970 when Williams formed a relationship with Patricia Law Skinner, a commissioning editor for ] and wife of the historian ].<ref name=NYT2003/><ref>Mike Peel, ''Shirley Williams: The Biography'', London: Biteback Publishing, 2013, 157.</ref> She had approached Williams to write the opposing view of utilitarianism for ''Utilitarianism: For and Against'' with ] (1973), and they had fallen in love.<ref name=Jeffries30Nov2002/> | |||
In addition to academic life, Williams chaired and served on a number of Royal Commissions and government committees. In the 1970s, he chaired the Committee on ] and Film ], which reported in 1979 that: | |||
Williams and Skinner began living together in 1971.<ref name=ODNB/> He obtained a divorce in 1974 (at Shirley Williams' request, the marriage was later annulled).<ref name=SWilliams2009p156/><ref name=Jeffries30Nov2002/> Patricia Skinner married him that year, and the couple went on to have two sons, Jacob in 1975 and Jonathan in 1980.<ref name=NYT2003/><ref name=ODNB/> Shirley Williams married the political scientist ] in 1987.<ref name=Beckett2005/> | |||
<blockquote>Given the amount of explicit sexual material in circulation and the allegations often made about its effects, it is striking that one can find case after case of sex crimes and murder without any hint at all that ] was present in the background. </blockquote> | |||
===Berkeley and Oxford=== | |||
The Committee's report was influenced by the liberal thinking of ], a philosopher greatly admired by Williams, who used Mill's principle of ] to develop what Williams called the "harm condition," whereby "no conduct should be suppressed by law unless it can be shown to harm someone." Williams concluded that, according to the harm condition, pornography could not be shown to be harmful and that "the role of pornography in influencing society is not very important ... to think anything else is to get the problem of pornography out of proportion with the many other problems that face our society today". The committee reported that, so long as children were protected from seeing it, adults should be free to read and watch pornography as they saw fit. However, ]'s first administration put an end to the ] agenda on ], and nearly put an end to Williams' political career too; he was not asked to chair another public committee for almost 15 years. | |||
]]] | |||
In 1979 Williams was elected ] of King's, a position he held until 1987. He spent a semester in 1986 at the ] as Mills Visiting Professor and in 1988 left England to become Monroe Deutsch Professor of Philosophy there, announcing to the media that he was leaving as part of the "]" of British academics to America. He was also Sather Professor of Classical Literature at Berkeley in 1989; ''Shame and Necessity'' (1995) grew out of his six Sather lectures.<ref name=Cal/><ref name=Davies1996/> | |||
Williams returned to England in 1990 as ] at Oxford and fellow of ]. His sons had been "at sea" in California, he said, not knowing what was expected of them, and he had been unable to help.<ref name=Davies1996/> He regretted having made his departure from England so public; he had been persuaded to do so to highlight Britain's relatively low academic salaries.{{refn|group=n|Bernard Williams, 2002: "I was persuaded that there was a real problem about academic conditions and that if my departure was publicized this would bring these matters to public attention. It did a bit, but it made me seem narky, and when I came back again in three years it looked rather absurd. I came back for personal reasons – it's harder to live out there with a family than I supposed."<ref name=Jeffries30Nov2002/>}} When he retired in 1996, he took up a fellowship again at All Souls.<ref name=Jeffries30Nov2002/> | |||
Apart from pornography, he also sat on commissions examining ] in 1971; ] in 1976–78; the role of ] in 1965–70; and social justice in 1993–94. | |||
===Royal commissions, committees=== | |||
"I did all the major vices," he said. | |||
]]] | |||
Williams served on several ]s and government committees: the Public Schools Commission (1965–1970), drug abuse (1971), gambling (1976–1978), the ] (1979), and the Commission on Social Justice (1993–1994). "I did all the major vices," he said.<ref name=Times14June2003/><ref>{{Cite news |title=Bernard Williams |url=https://www.economist.com/obituary/2003/06/26/bernard-williams |archive-url=https://archive.today/20221115151220/https://www.economist.com/obituary/2003/06/26/bernard-williams |archive-date=15 November 2022 |access-date=2024-02-04 |newspaper=] |issn=0013-0613}}</ref> While on the gambling commission, one of his recommendations, ignored at the time, was for a ].<ref name=Davies1996/> (John Major's government introduced one in 1994.) | |||
] described Williams's report on pornography in 1979, as chair of the Committee on Obscenity and Film Censorship, as "agreeable, actually compulsive to read."<ref>Mary Warnock, "The Williams Report on Obscenity and Film Censorship", ''The Political Quarterly'', 51(3), July 1980 (341–344), 341.</ref> It relied on a "harm condition" that "no conduct should be suppressed by law unless it can be shown to harm someone," and concluded that so long as children were protected from pornography, adults should be free to read and watch it as they see fit.<ref>Bernard Williams (ed.), ''Obscenity and Film Censorship: An Abridgement of the Williams Report'', Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015 , 69.</ref><ref name=Jeffries30Nov2002/><ref name=Telegraph14June2003>, ''The Daily Telegraph'', 14 June 2003.</ref> The report rejected the view that pornography tends to cause sexual offences.<ref>Anthony Skillen, "Offences Ranked: The Williams Report on Obscenity," ''Philosophy'', 57(220), April 1982 (237–245), 237. {{JSTOR|4619562}}</ref> Two cases in particular were highlighted, the ] and the ], where the influence of pornography had been discussed during the trials. The report argued that both cases appeared to be "more consistent with pre-existing traits being reflected both in a choice of reading matter and in the acts committed against others."<ref>Williams report, 6.7, 85.</ref> | |||
Williams was famously sharp in discussion. Oxford philosopher ] once said of him that "e understands what you're going to say better than you understand it yourself, and sees all the possible objections to it, all the possible answers to all the possible objections, before you've got to the end of your sentence." | |||
===Opera=== | |||
He was ] in 1999 and became a fellow of the ] and an honorary member of the ]. He sat on the board of the ] and wrote the entry for "opera" in the '']''. | |||
Williams enjoyed opera from an early age, particularly ] and ]. Patricia Williams writes that he attended performances of the ] and ] as a teenager.<ref>Patricia Williams, "Editorial preface," ''On Opera'', New Haven, Yale University Press, 2006, 1.</ref> In an essay on Wagner, he described having been reduced to a "virtually uncontrollable state" during a performance by ] as ] at ].<ref>Williams, ''On Opera'', 165; also see Bernard Williams, , ''The New York Review of Books'', 2 November 2000.</ref> He served on the board of the ] from 1968 to 1986,<ref name=ODNB/> and wrote an entry, "The Nature of Opera," for '']''.<ref name=Davies1996/><ref name=Baker22Sept2002>Kenneth Baker, , ''San Francisco Chronicle'', 22 September 2002.</ref> A collection of his essays, ''On Opera'', was published posthumously in 2006, edited by Patricia Williams.<ref name=Nussbaum2015/><ref>Jerry Fodor, , ''The Times Literary Supplement'', 17 January 2007.</ref> | |||
===Honours and death=== | |||
Williams died on ], ], while on holiday in ]. He had been suffering from ], a form of ]. He is survived by his wife, Patricia, their two sons, Jacob and Jonathan, and Rebecca, his daughter from his first marriage. | |||
Williams became a member of the Institut international de philosophie in 1969, a fellow of the ] in 1971 and an honorary member of the ] in 1983. The following year he was made a ] of the ] in Cambridge and later the chair. In 1993 he was elected to a fellowship of the ], and in 1999 he was knighted. Several universities awarded him honorary doctorates, including ] and ].<ref name=ODNB/><ref name=Cal/> | |||
Williams died of heart failure on 10 June 2003 while on holiday in Rome; he had been diagnosed in 1999 with ], a form of cancer.<ref name=ODNB/><ref name="Moore2003">{{Cite web |last=Moore |first=A. W. |date=2003 |title=Bernard Williams (1929-2003) |url=https://philosophynow.org/issues/42/Bernard_Williams_1929-2003 |access-date=2024-02-04 |website=]}}</ref> He was survived by his wife, their two sons, and his first child, Rebecca.<ref name=Times14June2003/> He was cremated in Rome.<ref name=ODNB/> | |||
==His moral philosophy== | |||
Williams' books and papers include studies of ] and ] philosophy, as well as more detailed attacks on ] and ]. | |||
] | |||
Williams was a systems destroyer, attacking all "isms" with equal vigour. He turned his back on the ] studied by most moral philosophers trained in the Western analytic tradition — "What is the Good?" and "What does the word 'ought' mean?" — and concentrated instead on ]. Williams tried to address the question of how to live a good life, with the emphasis on how to ''live'' it, not how to write an essay about it. He focused on the complexity, the "moral luck", of everyday life, and was highly critical of many of the moral philosophy textbooks with their dry examples frequently encountered by philosophy undergraduates. | |||
==Writing== | |||
In '']'' (1972), he wrote that "whereas most moral philosophy at most times has been empty and boring . . . contemporary moral philosophy has found an original way of being boring, which is by not discussing issues at all". The study of ], he argued, should be vital and compelling. He wanted to find a moral philosophy that was accountable to ] and to ], to ] and to ]. In his rejection of morality as what he called "a peculiar institution", by which he meant a discrete and separable domain of human thought, Williams resembled the ] ] philosopher ]. Williams greatly admired Nietzsche, often saying he wished he could quote Nietzsche on every page he wrote. | |||
===Approach to ethics=== | |||
] writes that Williams' work lies within the analytic tradition, although less typical of it "in its breadth, in its erudition, and above all in its profound humanity": | |||
<blockquote>Although he was never a vigorous apologist for that tradition, he always maintained the standards of clarity and rigour which it prizes, and his work is a model of all that is best in the tradition. It is brilliant, deep, and imaginative. It is also extraordinarily tight. There cannot be many critics of his work who have not thought of some objection to what he says, only to find, on looking for a relevant quotation to turn into a target, that Williams carefully presents his views in a way that precisely anticipates the objection.<ref name=Moore2003/></blockquote> | |||
Although Williams' disdain for reductionism sometimes made him appear a ], he was far from that. He believed, like the Ancient Greeks, that the so-called "thick" moral concepts, like ] and ], were real. What is brave and what is cruel is not relative, he argued. We do know these things when we see them. | |||
Williams did not produce any ethical theory or system; several commentators noted, unfairly in the view of his supporters, that he was largely a critic. Moore writes that Williams was unaffected by this criticism: "He simply refused to allow philosophical system-building to eclipse the subtlety and variety of human ethical experience."<ref name=ODNB/> He equated ethical theories with "a tidiness, a systematicity, and an economy of ideas," writes Moore, that were not up to describing human lives and motives. Williams tried not to lose touch "with the real concerns that animate our ordinary ethical experience," unlike much of the "arid, ahistorical, second-order" debates about ethics in philosophy departments.<ref name=Moore2003/><ref>Larissa MacFarquhar, , ''The New Yorker'', 5 September 2011 ().</ref> | |||
His last book, ''Truth And Truthfulness'' (2002), examines how philosophers ], ] and other followers of what he considered ] "sneer at any purported ] as ludicrously naive because it is, inevitably, distorted by ], ] bias and ]," wrote ''The Guardian'' in Williams' obituary. Unusually for a philosophy book, ''The Guardian'' said, ''Truth and Truthfulness'' makes the reader laugh, then want to cry. | |||
In his first book, ''Morality: An Introduction to Ethics'' (1972), Williams wrote that whereas "most moral philosophy at most times has been empty and boring ... ontemporary moral philosophy has found an original way of being boring, which is by not discussing moral issues at all."<ref>Williams, ''Morality'', 1972, xvii.</ref><ref>Onora Nell, "Review: ''Morality: An Introduction to Ethics'' by Bernard Williams," ''The Journal of Philosophy'' 72(12), 1975, 334–339. {{JSTOR|2025133}}</ref> He argued that the study of ethics should be vital, compelling and difficult, and he sought an approach that was accountable to psychology and history.<ref name=Koopman/><ref>Bernard Williams, ''Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy'', Abingdon: Routledge, 2011 , 193.</ref> | |||
==Critique of utilitarianism== | |||
Williams was particularly critical of ], a ] theory, the simplest version of which argues that moral acts are good only insofar as they promote the greatest ] of the greatest number, regardless of any issues of personhood or moral agency. | |||
Williams was not an ], holding that unlike scientific knowledge, which can approach an "absolute conception of reality," an ethical judgment rests on a point of view.<ref>Williams, ''Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy'', 139, 154.</ref><ref>A. W. Moore, "Realism and the Absolute Conception," in Alan Thomas (ed.), ''Bernard Williams'', Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007, 24–26.</ref> He argued that the ] ethical concepts, such as kindness and cruelty, express a "union of fact and value."<ref>Williams, ''Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy'', 143–144.</ref><ref>A. W. Moore, "Bernard Williams: ''Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy''," in John Shand (ed.), ''Central Works of Philosophy, Volume 5: The Twentieth Century: Quine and After'', Montreal: McGill-Queen's Press, 2006, 217.</ref> The idea that our values are not "in the world" was liberating: " radical form of freedom may be found in the fact that we cannot be forced by the world to accept one set of values rather than another" said Williams.<ref>Williams, ''Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy'', 142.</ref><ref>Carol Rovane, "Did Williams Find the Truth in Relativism?" in Daniel Callcut (ed.), ''Reading Bernard Williams'', Abingdon: Routledge, 2009.</ref><ref>Bernard Williams, "The Truth in Relativism," in ''Moral Luck: Philosophical Papers 1973–1980'', Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981. First published in ''Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society'', LXXV, 1974–1975, 215–228.</ref> | |||
One of Williams' famous arguments against utilitarianism centres on Jim, a scientist doing research in a ]n country led by a brutal dictator. One day, Jim finds himself in the central square of a small town facing 20 rebels, captured and tied up. The captain who has defeated them says that if Jim will kill one of the rebels, the others will be released, in honour of Jim's status as a guest. But if he does not, they will all be killed (''Utiliarianism: For and Against'', 1973). ''Simple act utilitarianism'' says that Jim should kill one of the captives in order to save the others. For most consequentialist theories, there is no moral dilemma in a case like this. All that matters is the outcome. | |||
Williams frequently emphasised what he saw as the ways in which luck pervades ethical life. He coined and developed the term ], and illustrated the idea of moral luck via a number of enormously influential examples. One of Williams's famous examples of moral luck concerns the painter ] decision to move to Tahiti.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://aeon.co/essays/living-the-life-authentic-bernard-williams-on-paul-gauguin|title=Living the life authentic: Bernard Williams on Paul Gauguin – Daniel Callcut {{!}} Aeon Essays|website=Aeon|language=en|access-date=18 December 2018}}</ref> | |||
Against this, Williams argued that there is a crucial moral distinction between a person being killed by me, and being killed by someone else because of what I do. The utilitarian loses that vital distinction, he argued, thereby stripping us of our ] and of everything that makes human life worthwhile, turning us into empty vessels by means of which ]s occur, rather than preserving our status as moral actors and decision-makers with ]. Moral decisions must preserve our integrity and our psychological ], he argued. | |||
===Critique of Kant=== | |||
An advocate of utilitarianism would reply that the theory cannot be dismissed as easily as that. The ] philosopher of economics ], for example, argued that moral agency, issues of integrity, and personal points of view can be worked into a consequentialist account; that is, they can be counted as consequences too (see Sen and Williams, 1982). For example, to solve ] problems in ], Williams wrote, a utilitarian would have to favour threatening to shoot anyone who parked in a prohibited space. If only a few people were shot for this, illegal parking would soon stop, and the shootings would be justified, according to simple act utilitarianism, because of the happiness the absence of parking problems would bring to millions of Londoners. Any theory that has this as a consequence, Williams argued, should be rejected out of hand, no matter how ] plausible it feels to agree that we do judge actions in terms of their consequences. We do not, argued Williams, and we must not. | |||
] (1724–1804)]] | |||
Williams's work throughout the 1970s and 1980s, in ''Morality: An Introduction to Ethics'' (1972), ''Problems of the Self'' (1973), ''Utilitarianism: For and Against'' with ] (1973), ''Moral Luck'' (1981) and ''Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy'' (1985), outlined his attacks on the twin pillars of ethics: ] and the moral philosophy of the 18th-century German philosopher ]. Martha Nussbaum wrote that his work "denounced the trivial and evasive way in which moral philosophy was being practised in England under the aegis of those two dominant theories."<ref name=Nussbaum2003/> "Both theories simplified the moral life," she wrote, "neglecting emotions and personal attachments and how sheer luck shapes our choices."<ref>Nussbaum 2009, 213.</ref><ref>Bernard Williams, "Moral Luck," in ''Moral Luck'', 1981, 20–39. First published in ''Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society'', supplementary volume 1, 1976, 115–135.</ref> (Williams said in 1996: "Roughly, if it isn't about obligation or consequences, it doesn't count.")<ref name=Davies1996/> | |||
Kant's '']'' (1785) expounded a moral system based on the ], one formulation of which is: "Act only according to that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it become a universal law."{{refn|group=n|Kant: "Der categorische Imperativ ist also nur ein einziger, und zwar dieser: "''handle nur nach derjenigen Maxime, durch die du zugleich wollen kannst, daß sie ein allgemeines Gesetz werde''."<ref>Immanuel Kant, ''Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals: A German-English edition'', 1786 , ] and ] (eds.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011, 4:421, 70–71.</ref>}} Rational agents must act on "principles of pure rational agency," writes Moore; that is, principles that regulate all rational agents. But Williams distinguished between thinking and acting. To think rationally is to think in a way compatible with belief in the truth, and "what it takes for one to believe the truth is the same as what it takes for anyone else to believe the truth," writes Moore. But one can ''act'' rationally by satisfying one's own desires (internal reasons for action), and what it takes to do that may not be what it takes for anyone else to satisfy theirs. Kant's approach to treating thinking and acting alike is wrong, according to Williams.<ref>Moore 2006, 213.</ref> | |||
However, as Sen and others have argued, rule utilitarianism would ask what rule could be extrapolated from the parking example. If the rule is "Anyone might be shot over a simple parking offence," the utilitarian would argue that the implementation of that rule would bring great unhappiness to Londoners, and that, on those grounds, threatening to shoot people would be wrong. For Williams, however, this type of argument simply proved his point. We do not, as a matter of fact, need to calculate whether or why threatening to shoot people over parking offences is wrong, and any system that shows us how to make that calculation is a system we should reject. | |||
Williams argued that Kant had given the "purest, deepest and most thorough representation of morality,"<ref>Williams, ''Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy'', 194.</ref> but that the "honourable instincts of Kantianism to defend the individuality of individuals against the agglomerative indifference of Utilitarianism" may not be effective against the Kantian "abstract character of persons as moral agents." We should not be expected to act as though we are not who we are in the circumstances in which we find ourselves.<ref>Bernard Williams, "Persons, character and morality," in Amélie Oksenberg Rorty (ed.), ''The Identities of Persons'', Berkeley: University of California Press, 1976 (197–216), 200–201, 215.</ref> | |||
==Critique of Kantianism== | |||
], 1724–1804. Williams rejected Kant's moral philosophy, arguing that moral principles should not require me to act as though I am someone else.]] | |||
One of the main rivals of utilitarianism is the moral philosophy of the ] German philosopher ]. Williams' work throughout the 1970s and 1980s — ''Morality: An Introduction to Ethics'' in 1972; ''Problems of the Self'' in 1973; ''Utilitarianism: For and Against'' with J.J.C. Smart, also in 1973; ''Moral Luck'' in 1981; and ''Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy'' in 1985 — outlined the basis of his attacks on the twin pillars of utilitarianism and Kantianism. ] wrote: | |||
===Critique of utilitarianism=== | |||
<blockquote>As a group these works denounced the trivial and evasive way in which moral philosophy was being practised in England under the aegis of those two dominant theories." </blockquote> | |||
{{further|Act utilitarianism|Rule utilitarianism|Preference utilitarianism}} | |||
Williams set out the case against ] – a ] position the simplest version of which is that actions are right only insofar as they promote the greatest happiness of the greatest number – in ''Utilitarianism: For and Against'' (1973) with ]. One of the book's ]s involves Jim, a botanist doing research in a South American country led by a brutal dictator. Jim finds himself in a small town facing 20 captured Indian rebels. The captain who has arrested them says that if Jim will kill one, the others will be released in honour of Jim's status as a guest, but if he does not, they will all be killed. Simple ] would favour Jim killing one of the men.<ref>J. J. C. Smart, Bernard Williams, ''Utilitarianism: For and Against'', Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973, 98–99.</ref> | |||
Williams argued that there is a crucial distinction between a person being killed by Jim, and being killed by the captain because of an act or omission of Jim's. The captain, if he chooses to kill, is not simply the medium of an effect ''Jim'' is having on the world. He is the moral actor, the person with the intentions and projects. The utilitarian loses that distinction, turning us into empty vessels by means of which consequences occur. Williams argued that moral decisions must preserve our psychological identity and integrity.<ref>Smart and Williams 1973, 109ff.</ref><ref>Daniel Markovits, "The architecture of integrity," in Daniel Callcut (ed.), ''Reading Bernard Williams'', Abingdon: Routledge, 2009.</ref> We should reject any system that reduces moral decisions to a few algorithms.<ref>Williams, ''Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy'', 117.</ref> | |||
Kant's '']'' and '']'' expounded a moral system based on what he called the ], the best known version of which is: "Act as if the maxim of your action were to become, by an act of ], a universal ] of ]". | |||
===Reasons for action=== | |||
This is a binding law, Kant argued, on any ] being with ]. You must imagine, when you act, that the rule underpinning your action will apply to everyone in similar circumstances, including yourself in future. If you cannot accept the consequences of this ], or if it leads to a contradiction, you must not carry out the act. For example, if you want to kill your wife's lover, you must imagine a law that says all wronged husbands have the right to kill their wives' lovers; and that will include you, should you become the lover of a married woman. In other words, you must ] your experience. | |||
{{Further|Internalism and externalism#Reasons}} | |||
Williams argued that there are only internal reasons for action: "A has a reason to φ if A has some desire the satisfaction of which will be served by his φ-ing."<ref>Bernard Williams, "Internal and external reasons," in ''Moral Luck'', 1981 (101–113), 101. First published in Ross Harrison (ed.), ''Rational action'', Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979, 17–28.</ref><ref>John Skorupski, "Internal reasons and the scope of blame," in Alan Thomas (ed.), ''Bernard Williams'', Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007, 74.</ref> An external reason would be "A has reason to φ," even if nothing in A's "subjective motivational set" would be furthered by her φ-ing. Williams argued that it is meaningless to say that there are external reasons; reason alone does not move people to action.<ref>Bernard Williams, "Internal Reasons and the Obscurity of Blame," 1989, reprinted in Williams, ''Making Sense of Humanity, and Other Philosophical Papers 1982–1993'', Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995, 35–45.</ref><ref>Bernard Williams, "Replies," in J. E. J. Altham, Ross Harrison (eds.), ''World, Mind and Ethics: Essays on the Ethical Philosophy of Bernard Williams'', Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.</ref><ref>Bernard Williams, "Postscript: Some Further Notes on Internal and External Reasons," in Elijah Millgram (ed.), ''Varieties of Practical Reasoning'', Cambridge: MIT Press, 2001.</ref><ref>Jenkins 2014, 89.</ref> | |||
] argues that, without external reasons for action, it becomes impossible to maintain that the same set of moral reasons applies to all agents equally.<ref name=Chappell>Sophie Grace Chappell, , ''Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy'', 8 November 2013 .</ref> In cases where someone has no internal reason to do what others see as the right thing, they cannot be blamed for failing to do it, because internal reasons are the only reasons, and blame, Williams wrote, "involves treating the person who is blamed like someone who had a reason to do the right thing but did not do it."<ref>Williams 1989, in '']'', 42.</ref><ref>Skorupski 2007, 93–94.</ref> | |||
Williams argued against the Categorical Imperative in his paper "Persons, character and morality" (''Moral Luck'', 1981). Morality should not require us to act selflessly, as though we are not who we are, as though we are not in the circumstances we presently find ourselves. We should not have to take an impartial view, or a ] view, of the world, he argued. Our ], commitments, and desires do make a difference to how we see the world and to how we act; and so they should, he said, otherwise we lose our individuality, and thereby our humanity. | |||
===Truth=== | |||
==Reasons for action== | |||
In his final completed book, ''Truth and Truthfulness: An Essay in Genealogy'' (2002), Williams identifies the two basic values of truth as accuracy and sincerity, and tries to address the gulf between the demand for truth and the doubt that any such thing exists.<ref>David E. Cooper, ''Truth and Truthfulness: An Essay in Genealogy'' by Bernard Williams," ''Philosophy'', 78(305), July 2003, 411–414. {{JSTOR|3752065}}</ref> Jane O'Grady wrote in a ''Guardian'' obituary of Williams that the book is an examination of those who "sneer at any purported truth as ludicrously naive because it is, inevitably, distorted by power, class bias and ideology."<ref name=OGrady/> | |||
Williams' insistence that morality is about people and their real lives, and that acting out of ] and even ] are not contrary to moral action, is illustrated in what is called his "internal reasons for action" argument, part of what philosophers call the "internal/external reasons" debate. | |||
The debt to ] is clear, most obviously in the adoption of a ] as a tool of explanation and critique. Although part of Williams's intention was to attack those he felt denied the value of truth, the book cautions that, to understand it simply in that sense, would be to miss part of its purpose; rather, as Kenneth Baker wrote, it is "Williams' reflection on the moral cost of the intellectual vogue for dispensing with the concept of truth."<ref name=Baker22Sept2002/> | |||
Before Williams, some philosophers tried to argue that moral agents had "external reasons" — by which they meant ] reasons, or reasons external to the moral agent — for performing a moral act. If action X was good, and was part of the Good, that alone was a reason to do X: a reason to act. Williams argued that this is meaningless nonsense. For something to be a "reason to act," it must be magnetic; that is, it must move us to action. But how can something entirely external to us — for example, the ] that X is good — be magnetic? By what process can something external to us move us to act? | |||
==Legacy== | |||
Williams argued that it cannot. ] is not magnetic. Knowing and feeling are quite separate, and a person must ''feel'' before they are moved to act. Reasons for action are always ''internal'', he argued. If I feel moved to do X (for example, to do something good), it is because I ''want'' to. I may want to do the right thing for a number of reasons. For example, I may have been brought up to believe that X is good and may wish to act in accordance with my upbringing (something we might call ]); or I may want to look good in someone else's eyes; or perhaps I fear the disapproval of my community. The reasons can be complex, but they are always internal and they always boil down to ]. | |||
Williams did not propose any systematic philosophical theory; indeed, he was suspicious of any such attempt.<ref name=Callcut2009>Daniel Callcut, "Introduction," in Callcut 2009, 1–2.</ref> He became known for his dialectical powers, although he was suspicious of them too. ] wrote that Williams had never been "impressed by the display of mere dialectical cleverness, least of all in moral philosophy": | |||
<blockquote>On the contrary, one of the most notable features of his philosophical outlook was an unwavering insistence on a series of points that may seem obvious but which are nevertheless all-too-frequently neglected: that moral or ethical thought is part of human life; that in writing about it, philosophers are writing about something of genuine importance; that it is not easy to say anything worth saying about the subject; that what moral philosophers write is answerable to the realities of human history, psychology, and social affairs; and that mere cleverness is indeed not the relevant measure of value."<ref name=Cal/></blockquote> | |||
With this argument, Williams left moral philosophy with the notion that a person's moral reasons must be rooted in his desires to act morally, desires that might, at any given moment, in any given person, be absent. | |||
{{quote box | |||
==Williams' philosophical legacy== | |||
|border=1px | |||
In a ] tradition, with no appeal to ] or any external moral authority, Williams' theory strikes at the very foundation of conventional morality: that one would sometimes do good even if one did not want to because, in order to be ], one had to. However, one question raised by the British moral philosopher, ], counters this approach by asking: is ''desiring'' to be good really a bad thing? Is it not more reasonable to argue that the person who ''wants'' to be good is a better person than the one who does not? To recognize that we act in accordance with our desires need not, Foot argued, rob us of morality. Although when left with self-interest as the basis for morality in a secular philosophy, good people will ''desire'' to do good for their own reasons, that selfish desire need not detract from the goodness of the subsequent act. | |||
|halign=left | |||
|quote=Being in Williams's presence is at times painful because of that intensity of aliveness, which challenges the friend to something or other, and yet it was, and is, not terribly clear to what. To authenticity, I now think: to being and expressing oneself more courageously and clearly than one had done heretofore. | |||
|fontsize=98% | |||
|bgcolor=#F9F9F9 | |||
|width=250px | |||
|align=right | |||
|salign=center | |||
|style=margin–top:1.5em;margin-bottom:1.5em;padding:2.0em | |||
|source= — ], 2015<ref name=Nussbaum2015>Martha C. Nussbaum, , ''The New Rambler'', 2015.</ref> | |||
}} | |||
In 1996 ] said that Williams had "a good claim to be the leading British philosopher of his day," but that, although he had a "lovely eye for the central questions," he had none of the answers.<ref name=Davies1996/> ] identified Williams's contribution to ethics as an overarching scepticism about attempts to create a foundation for moral philosophy, explicitly articulated in ''Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy'' (1985) and ''Shame and Necessity'' (1993), in which he argued that moral theories can never reflect the complexities of life, particularly given the radical pluralism of modern societies.<ref name=Thomas1999>Alan Thomas, "Williams, Bernard," in Robert Audi (ed.), ''The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy'', Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999 (2nd edition), 975.</ref> | |||
Learning to be yourself, to be authentic and to act with integrity, rather than conforming to any external moral system, is arguably the fundamental motif of Williams's work, according to Sophie Grace Chappell.<ref name=Chappell/> "If there's one theme in all my work it's about authenticity and self-expression," Williams said in 2002. "It's the idea that some things are in some real sense really you, or express what you and others aren't ... The whole thing has been about spelling out the notion of inner necessity."<ref name=Jeffries30Nov2002/> He moved moral philosophy away from the Kantian question, "What is my duty?", and back to the issue that mattered to the Greeks: "How should we live?"<ref name=Nussbaum2003/> | |||
By illuminating what he saw as the positive role of self-interest in moral action, a role largely neglected in ], Bernard Williams went on to become one of the leading English-language philosophers of his time, bringing moral philosophy firmly back into the arena of difficult lives being lived under difficult circumstances. | |||
==Publications== | |||
{{refbegin|2}} | |||
'''Books''' | |||
*(with Alan Montefiore, eds.) '']'', London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1966. | |||
*'']'', Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972. | |||
*'']'', Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973. | |||
*(with J. J. C. Smart) '']'', Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973. | |||
*'']'', London: Pelican Books, 1978. | |||
*''Moral Luck: Philosophical Papers 1973–1980'', Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981. | |||
*(with ]) ''Utilitarianism and Beyond'', Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982. | |||
*'']'', Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1985. | |||
*''Shame and Necessity'', Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993. | |||
*'']'', Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. | |||
* '']'', Abingdon: Routledge, 1998. | |||
*''Truth and Truthfulness: An Essay in Genealogy'', Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2002. | |||
'''Posthumously published''' | |||
==Books and papers by Bernard Williams== | |||
*''In the Beginning was the Deed: Realism and Moralism in Political Argument'', ed. Geoffrey Hawthorn, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2005. | |||
*'']'' (Cambridge University Press, 1972) | |||
*'' |
*''The Sense of the Past: Essays in the Philosophy Of History'', ed. Myles Burnyeat, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006. | ||
*'' |
*''Philosophy as a Humanistic Discipline'', ed. A. W. Moore, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006. | ||
*'']'', ed. Patricia Williams, New Haven: Yale University Press, 2006. | |||
*''Descartes: The Project of Pure Inquiry'' (Harvester Press, 1978) | |||
*'' |
*''Essays and Reviews: 1959–2002'', Princeton: Princeton University Press 2014. | ||
{{refend}} | |||
*''Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy'' (Harvard University Press, 1985) | |||
*''Shame and Necessity'' (University of California Press, 1993) | |||
'''Selected papers''' | |||
*''Making Sense of Humanity'' (Cambridge University Press, 1995) | |||
*''Truth and Truthfulness: An Essay in Genealogy'' (Princeton University Press, 2002)<br> | |||
{{refbegin|2}} | |||
*''In the Beginning Was the Deed: Realism and Moralism in Political Argument''. Edited by Geoffrey Hawthorne. (Princeton University Press, 2005) | |||
*] in Bernard Williams, ''Problems of the Self'', Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973, 207–229, first delivered in 1965 as Williams's inaugural lecture at Bedford College, London. | |||
*"Philosophy As a Humanistic Discipline," ''Philosophy'' 75 (294), Oct. 00, 477–496. | |||
*, in Bernard Williams, ''Problems of the Self'', Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973. | |||
*"Understanding Homer: Literature, History and Ideal Anthropology," in ''Being Humans: Anthropological Universality and Particularity in Transdisciplinary Perspectives'', ed. Neil Roughley, de Gruyter, 2000. | |||
*"Pagan Justice and Christian Love," ''Apeiron'' 26(3–4), December 1993, 195–207. | |||
*"Tolerating the Intolerable," in ''The Politics of Toleration'', ed. Susan Mendus, Edinburgh University Press, 1999. | |||
*" |
*"Cratylus's Theory of Names and Its Refutation," in Stephen Everson (ed.), ''Language'', Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994. | ||
*, ''Pennsylvania Law Review'' 142, May 1994, 1661–1673. | |||
*"Stoic Philosophy and the Emotions: Reply to Richard Sorabji," in Aristotle and After, ed. R. Sorabji, Bulletin Inst. Class Stud. London, Supplement 68, 1997. | |||
*"Descartes and the Historiography of Philosophy," in John Cottingham (ed.), ''Reason, Will and Sensation: Studies in Descartes's Metaphysics'', Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994. | |||
*"Contemporary Philosophy: A Second Look," in ''The Blackwell Companion to Philosophy'', ed. N. F. Bunnin, Blackwell, 1996. | |||
*" |
*"Acting as the Virtuous Person Acts," in Robert Heinaman (ed.), ''Aristotle and Moral Realism'', Westview Press, 1995. | ||
*] in A. C. Grayling (ed.), ''Philosophy: A Guide Through the Subject'', Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995. | |||
*"The Politics of Trust," in ''The Geography of Identity'', ed. Patricia Yeager, University of Michigan Press, 1996. | |||
*] in Henry Harris (ed.), ''Identity: Essays Based on Herbert Spencer Lectures Given in the University of Oxford'', Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995. | |||
*"The Women of Trachis: Fictions, Pessimism, Ethics," in ''The Greeks and Us'', ed. R. B. Louden and P. Schollmeier, Chicago University Press, 1996. | |||
*"Truth |
*"Truth in Ethics," ''Ratio'', 8(3), December 1995, 227–236. | ||
*, ''London Review of Books'', 18(8), 18 April 1996, 17–18 (). | |||
*"Toleration: An Impossible Virtue?" in ''Toleration: An Exclusive Virtue'', ed. David Heyd, Princeton University Press, 1996. | |||
*"Contemporary Philosophy: A Second Look," in N. F. Bunnin (ed.), ''The Blackwell Companion to Philosophy'', Blackwell, 1996. | |||
*"Reasons, Values and the Theory of Persuasion," in ''Ethics, Rationality and Economic Behavior'', ed. Francesco Farina, Frank Hahn and Stafano Vannucci, Oxford University Press, 1996. | |||
*"History, Morality, and the Test of Reflection," in Onora O'Neill (ed.), ''The Sources of Normativity'', Cambridge University Press, 1996. | |||
*"Truth in Ethics," ''Ratio'' 8(3), 1995, 227–42. | |||
*"Reasons, Values and the Theory of Persuasion," in Francesco Farina, Frank Hahn and Stafano Vannucci (eds.), ''Ethics, Rationality and Economic Behavior'', Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996. | |||
*"Acting as the Virtuous Person Acts," in ''Aristotle and Moral Realism'', ed. Robert Heinaman, Westview Press, 1995. | |||
*] in Patricia Yeager (ed.), ''The Geography of Identity'', Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1996. | |||
*"Ethics," in ''Philosophy: A Guide Through the Subject'', ed. A. C. Grayling, Oxford University Press, 1995. | |||
*] in R. B. Louden and P. Schollmeier (eds.), ''The Greeks and Us'', Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1996. | |||
*"Identity and Identities," in ''Identity: Essays Based on Herbert Spencer Lectures Given in the University of Oxford'', ed. Harris, Henry, Oxford University Press, 1995. | |||
*" |
*"Toleration: An Impossible Virtue?" in David Heyd (ed.), ''Toleration: An Exclusive Virtue'', Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996. | ||
*"Truth, Politics and Self-Deception," ''Social Research'' 63.3, Fall 1996. | |||
*"Descartes and the Historiography of Philosophy," in ''Reason, Will and Sensation: Studies in Descartes's Metaphysics'', ed. John Cottingham, Oxford University Press, 1994. | |||
*" |
*"Moral Responsibility and Political Freedom," ''Cambridge Law Journal'' 56, 1997. | ||
*"Stoic Philosophy and the Emotions: Reply to Richard Sorabji," in R. Sorabji (ed.), ''Aristotle and After'', ''Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies'', Supplement 68, 1997. | |||
*"Pagan Justice and Christian Love," ''Apeiron'' 26 (3–4), 1993, 195–207. | |||
*] in Susan Mendus (ed.), ''The Politics of Toleration'', Edinburgh University Press, 1999. | |||
*"Philosophy As a Humanistic Discipline," ''Philosophy'' 75, October 2000, 477–496. | |||
*"Understanding Homer: Literature, History and Ideal Anthropology," in Neil Roughley (ed.), ''Being Humans: Anthropological Universality and Particularity in Transdisciplinary Perspectives'', Walter de Gruyter, 2000. | |||
*, ''London Review of Books'', 24(20), 17 October 2002 (). | |||
{{refend}}* (as of 2011) by A.W. Moore and Jonathan Williams.<ref>{{Cite web|date=27 October 2011|title=Resources|url=https://bernardwilliams.wordpress.com/resources/|access-date=10 January 2022|website=Ethics and the Place of Philosophy|language=en}}</ref> | |||
==Notes== | ==Notes== | ||
{{reflist|group=n}} | |||
<references/> | |||
==References== | ==References== | ||
{{reflist|25em}} | |||
*Baker, Kenneth, An interview with Bernard Williams, ''San Francisco Chronicle'', September 22, 2002 | |||
*Foot, Philippa, "Reasons for Action and Desires," in ''Practical Reasoning,'' ed. Joseph Raz (Oxford University Press, 1978). | |||
*Jeffries, Stuart, ''The Guardian'', November 30, 2002 | |||
*McGinn, Colin, ''The New York Review of Books'', April 10, 2003. It is the introduction to a review of the book ''Truth and Truthfulness: An Essay in Genealogy'' by Bernard Williams. | |||
*Nussbaum, Martha, ''Boston Review'', October/November 2003 | |||
*Obituary, no byline, ''The Daily Telegraph'', June 14, 2003 | |||
*Obituary, no byline, ''The Times'', June 14, 2003 | |||
*Obituary, no byline, ''The Economist'', June 26, 2003 | |||
*O'Grady, Jane, ''The Guardian'', June 13, 2003 | |||
*Pearson, Richard, ''The Washington Post'', June 18, 2003 | |||
*Sen, Amartya, ''Ethics and Economics'' (Blackwell, 1989). | |||
*Sen, Amartya and Williams, Bernard (eds),''Utilitarianism and Beyond'' (Cambridge University Press, 1982). | |||
*Williams, Bernard, ''Moral Luck'' (Cambridge University Press, 1981). | |||
*Williams, Bernard, ''Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy'' (Harvard University Press, 1985). | |||
==Further reading== | ==Further reading== | ||
*Nagel, Thomas. , ''Mortal Questions'', Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979. | |||
*Chappell, Timothy, , ], February 2006 | |||
*Nagel, Thomas. , ''Encyclopædia Britannica''. | |||
*Sides, Carl Brock, ''Brock's Philosophy Page'', 1997, retrieved December 07 2004 | |||
*Perry, Alexandra; Herrera, Chris. ''The Moral Philosophy of Bernard Williams'', Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2011. | |||
*Williams, Bernard, ''London Review of Books'', October 17, 2002 (requires subscription) | |||
*, ''GuardianUnlimited'', November 2002 | |||
*McGinn, Colin, ''New York Review of Books'', April 10, 2003 (requires subscription) | |||
*Williams, Bernard, The Royal Institute of Philosophy, undated, retrieved December 7, 2004<br> | |||
<br> | |||
<center> | |||
{| id="toc" style="margin: 0 2em 0 2em;" | |||
|- | |||
| style="background:#ccccff" align="center" | This article is part of '''The ]''' series | |||
|- | |||
| align="left" style="background:#ccccff; font-size: 85%;" | ] philosophers: | |||
|- | |||
| align="center" style="font-size: 90%;" | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | Bernard Williams | |||
|- | |||
| align="left" style="background:#ccccff; font-size: 85%;" | ] philosophers: | |||
|- | |||
| align="center" style="font-size: 90%;" | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | ] | |||
|} | |||
</center> | |||
==External links== | |||
{{portalpar|Philosophy|Socrates.png}} | |||
{{Sister project links|d=Q345641|n=no|b=no|s=no|commons=no|wikt=no|v=no|voy=no|mw=no|species=no|m=no}} | |||
* {{Sep entry|williams-bernard|Bernard Williams|Sophie-Grace Chappell, Nicholas Smyth}} | |||
*, Bryan Magee interviews Bernard Williams, BBC, 1977, from 00:03:32. | |||
*, ''London Review of Books''. | |||
*, ''The New York Review of Books''. | |||
*, Paul Russell, ''Times Literary Supplement''. (Archived) | |||
*, Links to articles, interviews, videos and more. | |||
{{S-start}} | |||
{{S-aca}} | |||
{{Succession box | |||
|title = ] | |||
|years =1979–1987 | |||
|before =] | |||
|after =] | |||
}} | |||
{{End}} | |||
{{Ethics}} | |||
{{featured article}} | |||
{{Analytic philosophy}} | |||
{{White's Professor of Moral Philosophy, Oxford}} | |||
{{Authority control}} | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
{{DEFAULTSORT:Williams, Bernard}} | |||
] | |||
] | ] | ||
] | ] | ||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] |
Latest revision as of 21:57, 26 December 2024
English moral philosopher (1929–2003) For other people named Bernard Williams, see Bernard Williams (disambiguation).
SirBernard WilliamsFBA | |
---|---|
Born | Bernard Arthur Owen Williams (1929-09-21)21 September 1929 Westcliff-on-Sea, England |
Died | 10 June 2003(2003-06-10) (aged 73) Rome, Italy |
Education | Balliol College, Oxford |
Spouses |
|
Era | Contemporary philosophy |
Region | Western philosophy |
School | Analytic philosophy, Postanalytic philosophy |
Institutions | |
Academic advisors | Gilbert Ryle |
Notable students | Myles Burnyeat, Tim Mulgan, Jonathan Sacks, Martha Nussbaum |
Main interests | Ethics |
Notable ideas | Internal reasons for action, moral luck, dirty hands |
Sir Bernard Arthur Owen Williams FBA (21 September 1929 – 10 June 2003) was an English moral philosopher. His publications include Problems of the Self (1973), Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy (1985), Shame and Necessity (1993), and Truth and Truthfulness (2002). He was knighted in 1999.
As Knightbridge Professor of Philosophy at the University of Cambridge and Deutsch Professor of Philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley, Williams became known for his efforts to reorient the study of moral philosophy to psychology, history, and in particular to the Greeks. Described by Colin McGinn as an "analytical philosopher with the soul of a general humanist," he was sceptical about attempts to create a foundation for moral philosophy. Martha Nussbaum wrote that he demanded of philosophy that it "come to terms with, and contain, the difficulty and complexity of human life."
Williams was a strong supporter of women in academia; according to Nussbaum, he was "as close to being a feminist as a powerful man of his generation could be." He was also famously sharp in conversation. Gilbert Ryle, one of Williams's mentors at Oxford, said that he "understands what you're going to say better than you understand it yourself, and sees all the possible objections to it, and all the possible answers to all the possible objections, before you've got to the end of your own sentence."
Life
Early life and education
— Shirley Williams, 2009The young Bernard was in perpetual intellectual motion, like a dragonfly hovering above a sea of ideas. Everyone he encountered, every event that occurred were material for his insight and his wit.
Williams was born in Westcliff-on-Sea, a suburb of Southend, Essex, to Hilda Amy Williams, née Day, a personal assistant, and Owen Pasley Denny Williams, chief maintenance surveyor for the Ministry of Works. He was educated at Chigwell School, an independent school, where he first discovered philosophy. Reading D. H. Lawrence led him to ethics and the problems of the self. In his first book, Morality: An Introduction to Ethics (1972), he quoted with approval Lawrence's advice to "ind your deepest impulse, and follow that."
Awarded a scholarship to Oxford, Williams read Greats (pure Classics followed by Ancient History and philosophy) at Balliol. Among his influences at Oxford were W. S. Watt, Russell Meiggs, R. M. Hare, Elizabeth Anscombe, Eric Dodds, Eduard Fraenkel, David Pears and Gilbert Ryle. He shone in the first part of the course, the pure classics (being particularly fond of writing Latin verses in the style of Ovid) and graduated in 1951 with a congratulatory first in the second part of the course and a prize fellowship at All Souls.
After Oxford, Williams spent his two-year national service flying Spitfires in Canada for the Royal Air Force. While on leave in New York, he became close to Shirley Brittain Catlin (born 1930), daughter of the novelist Vera Brittain and the political scientist George Catlin. They had already been friends at Oxford. Catlin had moved to New York to study economics at Columbia University on a Fulbright scholarship.
Williams returned to England to take up his fellowship at All Souls and in 1954 became a fellow at New College, Oxford, a position he held until 1959. He and Catlin continued seeing each other. She began working for the Daily Mirror and sought election as a Labour MP. Williams, also a member of the Labour Party, helped her with the 1954 by-election in Harwich in which she was an unsuccessful candidate.
First marriage, London
Bernard Williams and Shirley Catlin were married in London in July 1955 at St James's, Spanish Place, near Marylebone High Street, followed by a honeymoon in Lesbos, Greece.
The couple moved into a very basic ground-floor apartment in London, on Clarendon Road, Notting Hill. Given how hard it was to find decent housing, they decided instead to share with Helge Rubinstein and her husband, the literary agent Hilary Rubinstein, who at the time was working for his uncle, Victor Gollancz. In 1955 the four of them bought a four-storey, seven-bedroom house in Phillimore Place, Kensington, for £6,800, a home they lived in together for 14 years. Williams described it as one of the happiest periods of his life.
In 1958, Williams spent a term teaching at the University of Ghana in Legon. When he returned to England in 1959, he was appointed lecturer in philosophy at University College London. In 1961, after four miscarriages in four years, Shirley Williams gave birth to their daughter, Rebecca.
Williams was a visiting professor at Princeton University in 1963, and was appointed Professor of Philosophy at Bedford College, London, in 1964. His wife was elected to parliament that year as the Labour member for Hitchin in Hertfordshire. The Sunday Times described the couple two years later as "the New Left at its most able, most generous, and sometimes most eccentric." Andy Beckett wrote that they "entertained refugees from eastern Europe and politicians from Africa, and drank sherry in noteworthy quantities." Shirley Williams became a junior minister and, in 1971, Shadow Home Secretary. Several newspapers saw her as a future prime minister. She went on to co-found a new centrist party in 1981, the Social Democratic Party; Williams left the Labour Party to join the SDP, although he later returned to Labour.
Cambridge, second marriage
In 1967, at the age of 38, Williams became the Knightbridge Professor of Philosophy at the University of Cambridge and a fellow of King's College.
According to Jane O'Grady, Williams was central to the decision by King's in 1972 to admit women, one of the first three all-male Oxbridge undergraduate colleges to do so. In both his first and second marriages, he supported his wives in their careers and helped with the children more than was common for men at the time. In the 1970s, when Nussbaum's thesis supervisor, G. E. L. Owen, was harassing female students, and she decided nevertheless to support him, Williams told her, during a walk along the backs at Cambridge: "ou know, there is a price you are paying for this support and encouragement. Your dignity is being held hostage. You really don't have to put up with this."
Shirley Williams's political career (the House of Commons regularly sat until 10 pm) meant that the couple spent a lot of time apart. They bought a house in Furneux Pelham, Hertfordshire, near the border with south Cambridgeshire, while she lived in Phillimore Place during the week to be close to the Houses of Parliament. Sunday was often the only day they were together. The differences in their personal values – he was an atheist, she a Catholic – placed a further strain on their relationship. It reached breaking point in 1970 when Williams formed a relationship with Patricia Law Skinner, a commissioning editor for Cambridge University Press and wife of the historian Quentin Skinner. She had approached Williams to write the opposing view of utilitarianism for Utilitarianism: For and Against with J. J. C. Smart (1973), and they had fallen in love.
Williams and Skinner began living together in 1971. He obtained a divorce in 1974 (at Shirley Williams' request, the marriage was later annulled). Patricia Skinner married him that year, and the couple went on to have two sons, Jacob in 1975 and Jonathan in 1980. Shirley Williams married the political scientist Richard Neustadt in 1987.
Berkeley and Oxford
In 1979 Williams was elected Provost of King's, a position he held until 1987. He spent a semester in 1986 at the University of California, Berkeley as Mills Visiting Professor and in 1988 left England to become Monroe Deutsch Professor of Philosophy there, announcing to the media that he was leaving as part of the "brain drain" of British academics to America. He was also Sather Professor of Classical Literature at Berkeley in 1989; Shame and Necessity (1995) grew out of his six Sather lectures.
Williams returned to England in 1990 as White's Professor of Moral Philosophy at Oxford and fellow of Corpus Christi. His sons had been "at sea" in California, he said, not knowing what was expected of them, and he had been unable to help. He regretted having made his departure from England so public; he had been persuaded to do so to highlight Britain's relatively low academic salaries. When he retired in 1996, he took up a fellowship again at All Souls.
Royal commissions, committees
Williams served on several royal commissions and government committees: the Public Schools Commission (1965–1970), drug abuse (1971), gambling (1976–1978), the Committee on Obscenity and Film Censorship (1979), and the Commission on Social Justice (1993–1994). "I did all the major vices," he said. While on the gambling commission, one of his recommendations, ignored at the time, was for a national lottery. (John Major's government introduced one in 1994.)
Mary Warnock described Williams's report on pornography in 1979, as chair of the Committee on Obscenity and Film Censorship, as "agreeable, actually compulsive to read." It relied on a "harm condition" that "no conduct should be suppressed by law unless it can be shown to harm someone," and concluded that so long as children were protected from pornography, adults should be free to read and watch it as they see fit. The report rejected the view that pornography tends to cause sexual offences. Two cases in particular were highlighted, the Moors Murders and the Cambridge Rapist, where the influence of pornography had been discussed during the trials. The report argued that both cases appeared to be "more consistent with pre-existing traits being reflected both in a choice of reading matter and in the acts committed against others."
Opera
Williams enjoyed opera from an early age, particularly Mozart and Wagner. Patricia Williams writes that he attended performances of the Carl Rosa Company and Sadler's Wells as a teenager. In an essay on Wagner, he described having been reduced to a "virtually uncontrollable state" during a performance by Jon Vickers as Tristan at Covent Garden. He served on the board of the English National Opera from 1968 to 1986, and wrote an entry, "The Nature of Opera," for The New Grove Dictionary of Opera. A collection of his essays, On Opera, was published posthumously in 2006, edited by Patricia Williams.
Honours and death
Williams became a member of the Institut international de philosophie in 1969, a fellow of the British Academy in 1971 and an honorary member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1983. The following year he was made a syndic of the Fitzwilliam Museum in Cambridge and later the chair. In 1993 he was elected to a fellowship of the Royal Society of Arts, and in 1999 he was knighted. Several universities awarded him honorary doctorates, including Yale and Harvard.
Williams died of heart failure on 10 June 2003 while on holiday in Rome; he had been diagnosed in 1999 with multiple myeloma, a form of cancer. He was survived by his wife, their two sons, and his first child, Rebecca. He was cremated in Rome.
Writing
Approach to ethics
A. W. Moore writes that Williams' work lies within the analytic tradition, although less typical of it "in its breadth, in its erudition, and above all in its profound humanity":
Although he was never a vigorous apologist for that tradition, he always maintained the standards of clarity and rigour which it prizes, and his work is a model of all that is best in the tradition. It is brilliant, deep, and imaginative. It is also extraordinarily tight. There cannot be many critics of his work who have not thought of some objection to what he says, only to find, on looking for a relevant quotation to turn into a target, that Williams carefully presents his views in a way that precisely anticipates the objection.
Williams did not produce any ethical theory or system; several commentators noted, unfairly in the view of his supporters, that he was largely a critic. Moore writes that Williams was unaffected by this criticism: "He simply refused to allow philosophical system-building to eclipse the subtlety and variety of human ethical experience." He equated ethical theories with "a tidiness, a systematicity, and an economy of ideas," writes Moore, that were not up to describing human lives and motives. Williams tried not to lose touch "with the real concerns that animate our ordinary ethical experience," unlike much of the "arid, ahistorical, second-order" debates about ethics in philosophy departments.
In his first book, Morality: An Introduction to Ethics (1972), Williams wrote that whereas "most moral philosophy at most times has been empty and boring ... ontemporary moral philosophy has found an original way of being boring, which is by not discussing moral issues at all." He argued that the study of ethics should be vital, compelling and difficult, and he sought an approach that was accountable to psychology and history.
Williams was not an ethical realist, holding that unlike scientific knowledge, which can approach an "absolute conception of reality," an ethical judgment rests on a point of view. He argued that the "thick" ethical concepts, such as kindness and cruelty, express a "union of fact and value." The idea that our values are not "in the world" was liberating: " radical form of freedom may be found in the fact that we cannot be forced by the world to accept one set of values rather than another" said Williams.
Williams frequently emphasised what he saw as the ways in which luck pervades ethical life. He coined and developed the term moral luck, and illustrated the idea of moral luck via a number of enormously influential examples. One of Williams's famous examples of moral luck concerns the painter Paul Gauguin's decision to move to Tahiti.
Critique of Kant
Williams's work throughout the 1970s and 1980s, in Morality: An Introduction to Ethics (1972), Problems of the Self (1973), Utilitarianism: For and Against with J. J. C. Smart (1973), Moral Luck (1981) and Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy (1985), outlined his attacks on the twin pillars of ethics: utilitarianism and the moral philosophy of the 18th-century German philosopher Immanuel Kant. Martha Nussbaum wrote that his work "denounced the trivial and evasive way in which moral philosophy was being practised in England under the aegis of those two dominant theories." "Both theories simplified the moral life," she wrote, "neglecting emotions and personal attachments and how sheer luck shapes our choices." (Williams said in 1996: "Roughly, if it isn't about obligation or consequences, it doesn't count.")
Kant's Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten (1785) expounded a moral system based on the categorical imperative, one formulation of which is: "Act only according to that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it become a universal law." Rational agents must act on "principles of pure rational agency," writes Moore; that is, principles that regulate all rational agents. But Williams distinguished between thinking and acting. To think rationally is to think in a way compatible with belief in the truth, and "what it takes for one to believe the truth is the same as what it takes for anyone else to believe the truth," writes Moore. But one can act rationally by satisfying one's own desires (internal reasons for action), and what it takes to do that may not be what it takes for anyone else to satisfy theirs. Kant's approach to treating thinking and acting alike is wrong, according to Williams.
Williams argued that Kant had given the "purest, deepest and most thorough representation of morality," but that the "honourable instincts of Kantianism to defend the individuality of individuals against the agglomerative indifference of Utilitarianism" may not be effective against the Kantian "abstract character of persons as moral agents." We should not be expected to act as though we are not who we are in the circumstances in which we find ourselves.
Critique of utilitarianism
Further information: Act utilitarianism, Rule utilitarianism, and Preference utilitarianismWilliams set out the case against utilitarianism – a consequentialist position the simplest version of which is that actions are right only insofar as they promote the greatest happiness of the greatest number – in Utilitarianism: For and Against (1973) with J. J. C. Smart. One of the book's thought experiments involves Jim, a botanist doing research in a South American country led by a brutal dictator. Jim finds himself in a small town facing 20 captured Indian rebels. The captain who has arrested them says that if Jim will kill one, the others will be released in honour of Jim's status as a guest, but if he does not, they will all be killed. Simple act utilitarianism would favour Jim killing one of the men.
Williams argued that there is a crucial distinction between a person being killed by Jim, and being killed by the captain because of an act or omission of Jim's. The captain, if he chooses to kill, is not simply the medium of an effect Jim is having on the world. He is the moral actor, the person with the intentions and projects. The utilitarian loses that distinction, turning us into empty vessels by means of which consequences occur. Williams argued that moral decisions must preserve our psychological identity and integrity. We should reject any system that reduces moral decisions to a few algorithms.
Reasons for action
Further information: Internalism and externalism § ReasonsWilliams argued that there are only internal reasons for action: "A has a reason to φ if A has some desire the satisfaction of which will be served by his φ-ing." An external reason would be "A has reason to φ," even if nothing in A's "subjective motivational set" would be furthered by her φ-ing. Williams argued that it is meaningless to say that there are external reasons; reason alone does not move people to action.
Sophie-Grace Chappell argues that, without external reasons for action, it becomes impossible to maintain that the same set of moral reasons applies to all agents equally. In cases where someone has no internal reason to do what others see as the right thing, they cannot be blamed for failing to do it, because internal reasons are the only reasons, and blame, Williams wrote, "involves treating the person who is blamed like someone who had a reason to do the right thing but did not do it."
Truth
In his final completed book, Truth and Truthfulness: An Essay in Genealogy (2002), Williams identifies the two basic values of truth as accuracy and sincerity, and tries to address the gulf between the demand for truth and the doubt that any such thing exists. Jane O'Grady wrote in a Guardian obituary of Williams that the book is an examination of those who "sneer at any purported truth as ludicrously naive because it is, inevitably, distorted by power, class bias and ideology."
The debt to Friedrich Nietzsche is clear, most obviously in the adoption of a genealogical method as a tool of explanation and critique. Although part of Williams's intention was to attack those he felt denied the value of truth, the book cautions that, to understand it simply in that sense, would be to miss part of its purpose; rather, as Kenneth Baker wrote, it is "Williams' reflection on the moral cost of the intellectual vogue for dispensing with the concept of truth."
Legacy
Williams did not propose any systematic philosophical theory; indeed, he was suspicious of any such attempt. He became known for his dialectical powers, although he was suspicious of them too. Alan Code wrote that Williams had never been "impressed by the display of mere dialectical cleverness, least of all in moral philosophy":
On the contrary, one of the most notable features of his philosophical outlook was an unwavering insistence on a series of points that may seem obvious but which are nevertheless all-too-frequently neglected: that moral or ethical thought is part of human life; that in writing about it, philosophers are writing about something of genuine importance; that it is not easy to say anything worth saying about the subject; that what moral philosophers write is answerable to the realities of human history, psychology, and social affairs; and that mere cleverness is indeed not the relevant measure of value."
— Martha Nussbaum, 2015Being in Williams's presence is at times painful because of that intensity of aliveness, which challenges the friend to something or other, and yet it was, and is, not terribly clear to what. To authenticity, I now think: to being and expressing oneself more courageously and clearly than one had done heretofore.
In 1996 Martin Hollis said that Williams had "a good claim to be the leading British philosopher of his day," but that, although he had a "lovely eye for the central questions," he had none of the answers. Alan Thomas identified Williams's contribution to ethics as an overarching scepticism about attempts to create a foundation for moral philosophy, explicitly articulated in Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy (1985) and Shame and Necessity (1993), in which he argued that moral theories can never reflect the complexities of life, particularly given the radical pluralism of modern societies.
Learning to be yourself, to be authentic and to act with integrity, rather than conforming to any external moral system, is arguably the fundamental motif of Williams's work, according to Sophie Grace Chappell. "If there's one theme in all my work it's about authenticity and self-expression," Williams said in 2002. "It's the idea that some things are in some real sense really you, or express what you and others aren't ... The whole thing has been about spelling out the notion of inner necessity." He moved moral philosophy away from the Kantian question, "What is my duty?", and back to the issue that mattered to the Greeks: "How should we live?"
Publications
Books
- (with Alan Montefiore, eds.) British Analytical Philosophy, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1966.
- Morality: An Introduction to Ethics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972.
- Problems of the Self, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973.
- (with J. J. C. Smart) Utilitarianism: For and Against, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973.
- Descartes: The Project of Pure Enquiry, London: Pelican Books, 1978.
- Moral Luck: Philosophical Papers 1973–1980, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981.
- (with Amartya Sen) Utilitarianism and Beyond, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982.
- Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1985.
- Shame and Necessity, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993.
- Making Sense of Humanity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.
- The Great Philosophers: Plato, Abingdon: Routledge, 1998.
- Truth and Truthfulness: An Essay in Genealogy, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2002.
Posthumously published
- In the Beginning was the Deed: Realism and Moralism in Political Argument, ed. Geoffrey Hawthorn, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2005.
- The Sense of the Past: Essays in the Philosophy Of History, ed. Myles Burnyeat, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006.
- Philosophy as a Humanistic Discipline, ed. A. W. Moore, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006.
- On Opera, ed. Patricia Williams, New Haven: Yale University Press, 2006.
- Essays and Reviews: 1959–2002, Princeton: Princeton University Press 2014.
Selected papers
- "Morality and the emotions," in Bernard Williams, Problems of the Self, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973, 207–229, first delivered in 1965 as Williams's inaugural lecture at Bedford College, London.
- "The Makropulos Case: Reflections on the tedium of immortality", in Bernard Williams, Problems of the Self, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973.
- "Pagan Justice and Christian Love," Apeiron 26(3–4), December 1993, 195–207.
- "Cratylus's Theory of Names and Its Refutation," in Stephen Everson (ed.), Language, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994.
- "The Actus Reus of Dr. Caligari", Pennsylvania Law Review 142, May 1994, 1661–1673.
- "Descartes and the Historiography of Philosophy," in John Cottingham (ed.), Reason, Will and Sensation: Studies in Descartes's Metaphysics, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994.
- "Acting as the Virtuous Person Acts," in Robert Heinaman (ed.), Aristotle and Moral Realism, Westview Press, 1995.
- "Ethics," in A. C. Grayling (ed.), Philosophy: A Guide Through the Subject, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995.
- "Identity and Identities," in Henry Harris (ed.), Identity: Essays Based on Herbert Spencer Lectures Given in the University of Oxford, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995.
- "Truth in Ethics," Ratio, 8(3), December 1995, 227–236.
- "On Hating and Despising Philosophy", London Review of Books, 18(8), 18 April 1996, 17–18 (courtesy link).
- "Contemporary Philosophy: A Second Look," in N. F. Bunnin (ed.), The Blackwell Companion to Philosophy, Blackwell, 1996.
- "History, Morality, and the Test of Reflection," in Onora O'Neill (ed.), The Sources of Normativity, Cambridge University Press, 1996.
- "Reasons, Values and the Theory of Persuasion," in Francesco Farina, Frank Hahn and Stafano Vannucci (eds.), Ethics, Rationality and Economic Behavior, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.
- "The Politics of Trust," in Patricia Yeager (ed.), The Geography of Identity, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1996.
- "The Women of Trachis: Fictions, Pessimism, Ethics," in R. B. Louden and P. Schollmeier (eds.), The Greeks and Us, Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1996.
- "Toleration: An Impossible Virtue?" in David Heyd (ed.), Toleration: An Exclusive Virtue, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996.
- "Truth, Politics and Self-Deception," Social Research 63.3, Fall 1996.
- "Moral Responsibility and Political Freedom," Cambridge Law Journal 56, 1997.
- "Stoic Philosophy and the Emotions: Reply to Richard Sorabji," in R. Sorabji (ed.), Aristotle and After, Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies, Supplement 68, 1997.
- "Tolerating the Intolerable," in Susan Mendus (ed.), The Politics of Toleration, Edinburgh University Press, 1999.
- "Philosophy As a Humanistic Discipline," Philosophy 75, October 2000, 477–496.
- "Understanding Homer: Literature, History and Ideal Anthropology," in Neil Roughley (ed.), Being Humans: Anthropological Universality and Particularity in Transdisciplinary Perspectives, Walter de Gruyter, 2000.
- "Why Philosophy Needs History", London Review of Books, 24(20), 17 October 2002 (courtesy link).
*Complete Bibliography (as of 2011) by A.W. Moore and Jonathan Williams.
Notes
- Shirley Williams, 2002: "Ours was a very alive marriage, but there was something of a strain that comes from two things. One is that we were both too caught up in what we were respectively doing – we didn't spend all that much time together; the other, to be completely honest, is that I'm fairly unjudgmental and I found Bernard's capacity for pretty sharp putting-down of people he thought were stupid unacceptable. ... He can be very painful sometimes. He can eviscerate somebody. Those who are left behind are, as it were, dead personalities."
- Bernard Williams, 2002: "I was persuaded that there was a real problem about academic conditions and that if my departure was publicized this would bring these matters to public attention. It did a bit, but it made me seem narky, and when I came back again in three years it looked rather absurd. I came back for personal reasons – it's harder to live out there with a family than I supposed."
- Kant: "Der categorische Imperativ ist also nur ein einziger, und zwar dieser: "handle nur nach derjenigen Maxime, durch die du zugleich wollen kannst, daß sie ein allgemeines Gesetz werde."
References
- Mark P. Jenkins, Bernard Williams, Abingdon: Routledge, 2014 , 3.
- ^ Colin Koopman, "Bernard Williams on Philosophy's Need for History," The Review of Metaphysics, 64(1), September 2010, 3–30. JSTOR 29765339
- McGinn, Colin (10 April 2003). "Isn't It the Truth?". New York Review of Books. ISSN 0028-7504. Archived from the original on 8 May 2021. Retrieved 3 February 2024.
- Martha C. Nussbaum, "Tragedies, hope, justice," in Daniel Callcut (ed.), Reading Bernard Williams, Abingdon: Routledge, 2009, 213.
- ^ Martha C. Nussbaum, "Tragedy and Justice" Archived 8 December 2004 at the Wayback Machine, Boston Review, October/November 2003.
- Magee, Bryan (1998). Confessions of a philosopher. Internet Archive. London : Phoenix. p. 104. ISBN 978-0-7538-0471-1 – via Internet Archive.
- ^ Shirley Williams, Climbing the Bookshelves, London: Virago, 2009, 90.
- Shirley Williams 2009, 115.
- ^ Christopher Lehmann-Haupt, "Sir Bernard Williams, 73, Oxford Philosopher, Dies", The New York Times, 14 June 2003.
- Supplement to the London Gazette, 10 June 1961, 4157.
- ^ Stuart Jeffries, "The Quest for Truth", The Guardian, 30 November 2002.
- ^ Bernard Williams, "A Mistrustful Animal: A Conversation with Bernard Williams," Harvard Review 12.1: 2004. Reprinted in Alex Voorhoeve (ed.), Conversations on Ethics, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009, 196–197.
- ^ John, Davies (1 November 1996). "A fugitive from the pigeonhole". Times Higher Education (THE). Retrieved 4 February 2024.
- Bernard Williams, Morality: An Introduction to Ethics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972, 79.
- ^ A. W. Moore, "Williams, Sir Bernard Arthur Owen (1929–2003), philosopher", Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, January 2007.
- ^ "Professor Sir Bernard Williams". The Times. 13 May 2011. Archived from the original on 13 May 2011. Retrieved 3 February 2024.
- ^ Alan Code, Samuel Scheffler, Barry Stroud, "In Memoriam: Bernard A. O. Williams" Archived 16 April 2015 at the Wayback Machine , University of California.
- Shirley Williams 2009, 104, 114.
- Shirley Williams 2009, 116–117.
- Shirley Williams 2009, 120, 136, 154.
- Shirley Williams 2009, 132.
- Shirley Williams, God and Caesar: Personal Reflections on Politics and Religion, A&C Black, 2004, 17; Shirley Williams 2009, 132, 139.
- Shirley Williams 2009, 143, 155.
- ^ Andy Beckett, "Centre forward", The Guardian, 2 April 2005.
- Maya Oppenheim, "Baroness Shirley Williams: The Lib Dem co-founder once predicted to become the first female prime minister of Britain", The Independent, 11 February 2016.
- ^ Jane O'Grady, "Professor Sir Bernard Williams", The Guardian, 13 June 2003.
- Martha C. Nussbaum, "'Don't smile so much': Philosophy and Women in the 1970s," in Linda Martín Alcoff (ed.), Singing in the Fire: Stories of Women in Philosophy, Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2003 (93–108), 100.
- ^ Shirley Williams 2009, 156–157.
- "Shirley Williams: Views from the peer", Hertfordshire Life, 13 January 2010.
- Mike Peel, Shirley Williams: The Biography, London: Biteback Publishing, 2013, 157.
- "Bernard Williams". The Economist. ISSN 0013-0613. Archived from the original on 15 November 2022. Retrieved 4 February 2024.
- Mary Warnock, "The Williams Report on Obscenity and Film Censorship", The Political Quarterly, 51(3), July 1980 (341–344), 341.
- Bernard Williams (ed.), Obscenity and Film Censorship: An Abridgement of the Williams Report, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015 , 69.
- "Professor Sir Bernard Williams", The Daily Telegraph, 14 June 2003.
- Anthony Skillen, "Offences Ranked: The Williams Report on Obscenity," Philosophy, 57(220), April 1982 (237–245), 237. JSTOR 4619562
- Williams report, 6.7, 85.
- Patricia Williams, "Editorial preface," On Opera, New Haven, Yale University Press, 2006, 1.
- Williams, On Opera, 165; also see Bernard Williams, "Wagner & Politics", The New York Review of Books, 2 November 2000.
- ^ Kenneth Baker, "Bernard Williams: Carrying the torch for truth", San Francisco Chronicle, 22 September 2002.
- ^ Martha C. Nussbaum, "Moral (and Musical) Hazard", The New Rambler, 2015.
- Jerry Fodor, "Life in tune", The Times Literary Supplement, 17 January 2007.
- ^ Moore, A. W. (2003). "Bernard Williams (1929-2003)". Philosophy Now. Retrieved 4 February 2024.
- Larissa MacFarquhar, "How to be good", The New Yorker, 5 September 2011 (archived).
- Williams, Morality, 1972, xvii.
- Onora Nell, "Review: Morality: An Introduction to Ethics by Bernard Williams," The Journal of Philosophy 72(12), 1975, 334–339. JSTOR 2025133
- Bernard Williams, Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy, Abingdon: Routledge, 2011 , 193.
- Williams, Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy, 139, 154.
- A. W. Moore, "Realism and the Absolute Conception," in Alan Thomas (ed.), Bernard Williams, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007, 24–26.
- Williams, Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy, 143–144.
- A. W. Moore, "Bernard Williams: Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy," in John Shand (ed.), Central Works of Philosophy, Volume 5: The Twentieth Century: Quine and After, Montreal: McGill-Queen's Press, 2006, 217.
- Williams, Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy, 142.
- Carol Rovane, "Did Williams Find the Truth in Relativism?" in Daniel Callcut (ed.), Reading Bernard Williams, Abingdon: Routledge, 2009.
- Bernard Williams, "The Truth in Relativism," in Moral Luck: Philosophical Papers 1973–1980, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981. First published in Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, LXXV, 1974–1975, 215–228.
- "Living the life authentic: Bernard Williams on Paul Gauguin – Daniel Callcut | Aeon Essays". Aeon. Retrieved 18 December 2018.
- Nussbaum 2009, 213.
- Bernard Williams, "Moral Luck," in Moral Luck, 1981, 20–39. First published in Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, supplementary volume 1, 1976, 115–135.
- Immanuel Kant, Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals: A German-English edition, 1786 , Mary Gregor and Jens Timmermann (eds.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011, 4:421, 70–71.
- Moore 2006, 213.
- Williams, Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy, 194.
- Bernard Williams, "Persons, character and morality," in Amélie Oksenberg Rorty (ed.), The Identities of Persons, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1976 (197–216), 200–201, 215.
- J. J. C. Smart, Bernard Williams, Utilitarianism: For and Against, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973, 98–99.
- Smart and Williams 1973, 109ff.
- Daniel Markovits, "The architecture of integrity," in Daniel Callcut (ed.), Reading Bernard Williams, Abingdon: Routledge, 2009.
- Williams, Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy, 117.
- Bernard Williams, "Internal and external reasons," in Moral Luck, 1981 (101–113), 101. First published in Ross Harrison (ed.), Rational action, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979, 17–28.
- John Skorupski, "Internal reasons and the scope of blame," in Alan Thomas (ed.), Bernard Williams, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007, 74.
- Bernard Williams, "Internal Reasons and the Obscurity of Blame," 1989, reprinted in Williams, Making Sense of Humanity, and Other Philosophical Papers 1982–1993, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995, 35–45.
- Bernard Williams, "Replies," in J. E. J. Altham, Ross Harrison (eds.), World, Mind and Ethics: Essays on the Ethical Philosophy of Bernard Williams, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.
- Bernard Williams, "Postscript: Some Further Notes on Internal and External Reasons," in Elijah Millgram (ed.), Varieties of Practical Reasoning, Cambridge: MIT Press, 2001.
- Jenkins 2014, 89.
- ^ Sophie Grace Chappell, "Bernard Williams", Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 8 November 2013 .
- Williams 1989, in Making Sense of Humanity, 42.
- Skorupski 2007, 93–94.
- David E. Cooper, Truth and Truthfulness: An Essay in Genealogy by Bernard Williams," Philosophy, 78(305), July 2003, 411–414. JSTOR 3752065
- Daniel Callcut, "Introduction," in Callcut 2009, 1–2.
- Alan Thomas, "Williams, Bernard," in Robert Audi (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999 (2nd edition), 975.
- "Resources". Ethics and the Place of Philosophy. 27 October 2011. Retrieved 10 January 2022.
Further reading
- Nagel, Thomas. "Moral Luck", Mortal Questions, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979.
- Nagel, Thomas. "Sir Bernard Williams", Encyclopædia Britannica.
- Perry, Alexandra; Herrera, Chris. The Moral Philosophy of Bernard Williams, Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2011.
External links
- Sophie-Grace Chappell, Nicholas Smyth. "Bernard Williams". In Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
- "The Spell of Linguistic Philosophy", Bryan Magee interviews Bernard Williams, BBC, 1977, from 00:03:32.
- "Bernard Williams", London Review of Books.
- "Bernard Williams", The New York Review of Books.
- "Bernard Williams: Ethics from a Human Point of View", Paul Russell, Times Literary Supplement. (Archived)
- "Bernard Williams: Philosopher", Links to articles, interviews, videos and more.
Academic offices | ||
---|---|---|
Preceded byEdmund Leach | Provost of King's College, Cambridge 1979–1987 |
Succeeded byPatrick Bateson |
Analytic philosophy | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Related articles |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theories | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Concepts |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Philosophers |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
- 1929 births
- 2003 deaths
- Military personnel from Southend-on-Sea
- 20th-century Royal Air Force personnel
- Royal Air Force airmen
- 20th-century atheists
- 20th-century English philosophers
- 21st-century atheists
- 21st-century English philosophers
- Academics of University College London
- Alumni of Balliol College, Oxford
- Analytic philosophers
- Atheist philosophers
- English ethicists
- People with multiple myeloma
- Descartes scholars
- English atheists
- British epistemologists
- Fellows of All Souls College, Oxford
- Fellows of King's College, Cambridge
- Fellows of New College, Oxford
- Fellows of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences
- Fellows of the British Academy
- Knights Bachelor
- British metaphysicians
- Ontologists
- People educated at Chigwell School
- People from Westcliff-on-Sea
- British philosophers of culture
- Philosophers of history
- Philosophers of identity
- Philosophers of psychology
- Provosts of King's College, Cambridge
- Spouses of British politicians
- Spouses of life peers
- University of California, Berkeley faculty
- White's Professors of Moral Philosophy
- Knightbridge Professors of Philosophy
- Deaths from congestive heart failure