authors:
- Schmidtz, David
content: 'It is widely assumed that political philosophy is dependent on moral philosophy.
  That is, in order to argue about political issues, one has to first sort out morality.
  The philosopher David Schmidtz argues in his book "Living together. Inventing moral
  science" that it is the other way around. The problem of how to live together, that
  is, politics, is primary. Morality then becomes part of the solution. The question
  "how to live together?" is more fundamental than "how to live?".


  The book takes the form of a set of separate essays which are arranged to fit together.
  This is successful up to a point; a few of the chapters do not really contribute
  all that much to the main theme. It makes for an uneven reading experience. Some
  of the chapters are excellent, with insights that make you think, while a few are
  more technical and not very inspiring.


  Schmidtz uses the term "moral science". This refers to the constellation of subject
  fields such as social science, philosophy, economy, anthropology, etc, which can
  or could contribute to the study of how humans could live together and flourish.
  During the Scottish Enlightenment, whose main figures were David Hume and Adam Smith,
  moral and political philosophy was an empirical project. Their salient question
  was "what works?". However during the 1800s, and even more strongly during the 1900s,
  the discussion changed topic to "how to act?". This was a change for the worse,
  in Schmidtz view.


  Schmidtz points out that in a world where there are multiple agents, each with their
  own project(s), it is not enough to just consider how to act. One must include the
  fact that others will respond from the very beginning of the analysis. These others
  will not necessarily want to act according to your wishes, and they will not have
  the same goals. Every act of yours will entail a response from them which will affect
  the outcome. Living together implies having to deal with this. Moral and political
  philosophy must therefore seriously consider the problems of living together and
  the strategies that can be employed to solve these problems. Schmidtz accuses, among
  others, John Rawls for making assumptions which amount to serious evasions of several
  basic conundrums of life in a society. Strategy is essential and cannot be approximated
  away.


  The book contains a very interesting discussion of idealist versus realist positions
  in moral and political philosophy. One important strand here is the argument that
  justice cannot be derived from axioms, but is instead an evolving response to the
  human condition. Empiricism, in a certain sense, must be the focus, rather than
  deductively arguing from first principles.


  I am intrigued and happy to see that David Schmidtz towards the end of the book
  makes explicit the point that I believe is implicit in how he starts out his argument.
  Namely, that one must consider the evolutionary history of the human species to
  fully understand justice and morality. He writes: "We are social and political animals,
  and justice is a human adaption to an ecological niche." In a chapter written with
  Jason Brennan titled "A Brief History of the Human Condition", there is a description
  of how important cooperation is for humans, and how it has evolved and formed our
  species. I wish that this would have been the starting chapter of the book, because
  this story is in fact central to how moral and political philosophy should be restated.


  There are many thoughts and arguments in this book that invite discussion. Indeed,
  there are many that are not fully developed or joined together in a more coherent
  fashion. I leave the book with a sense of having seen glimpses of a new start for
  moral and political philosophy. But it is tentative, which is both good, since it
  opens the door for further development, and bad, since as it is, the account is
  too fragmented and does not form a sustained and complete argument.'
date: '2023-08-08'
edition:
  published: '2023'
  publisher: Oxford University Press
goodreads: '62559516'
html: '<p>It is widely assumed that political philosophy is dependent on moral philosophy.
  That is, in order to argue about political issues, one has to first sort out morality.
  The philosopher David Schmidtz argues in his book &quot;Living together. Inventing
  moral science&quot; that it is the other way around. The problem of how to live
  together, that is, politics, is primary. Morality then becomes part of the solution.
  The question &quot;how to live together?&quot; is more fundamental than &quot;how
  to live?&quot;.</p>

  <p>The book takes the form of a set of separate essays which are arranged to fit
  together. This is successful up to a point; a few of the chapters do not really
  contribute all that much to the main theme. It makes for an uneven reading experience.
  Some of the chapters are excellent, with insights that make you think, while a few
  are more technical and not very inspiring.</p>

  <p>Schmidtz uses the term &quot;moral science&quot;. This refers to the constellation
  of subject fields such as social science, philosophy, economy, anthropology, etc,
  which can or could contribute to the study of how humans could live together and
  flourish. During the Scottish Enlightenment, whose main figures were David Hume
  and Adam Smith, moral and political philosophy was an empirical project. Their salient
  question was &quot;what works?&quot;. However during the 1800s, and even more strongly
  during the 1900s, the discussion changed topic to &quot;how to act?&quot;. This
  was a change for the worse, in Schmidtz view.</p>

  <p>Schmidtz points out that in a world where there are multiple agents, each with
  their own project(s), it is not enough to just consider how to act. One must include
  the fact that others will respond from the very beginning of the analysis. These
  others will not necessarily want to act according to your wishes, and they will
  not have the same goals. Every act of yours will entail a response from them which
  will affect the outcome. Living together implies having to deal with this. Moral
  and political philosophy must therefore seriously consider the problems of living
  together and the strategies that can be employed to solve these problems. Schmidtz
  accuses, among others, John Rawls for making assumptions which amount to serious
  evasions of several basic conundrums of life in a society. Strategy is essential
  and cannot be approximated away.</p>

  <p>The book contains a very interesting discussion of idealist versus realist positions
  in moral and political philosophy. One important strand here is the argument that
  justice cannot be derived from axioms, but is instead an evolving response to the
  human condition. Empiricism, in a certain sense, must be the focus, rather than
  deductively arguing from first principles.</p>

  <p>I am intrigued and happy to see that David Schmidtz towards the end of the book
  makes explicit the point that I believe is implicit in how he starts out his argument.
  Namely, that one must consider the evolutionary history of the human species to
  fully understand justice and morality. He writes: &quot;We are social and political
  animals, and justice is a human adaption to an ecological niche.&quot; In a chapter
  written with Jason Brennan titled &quot;A Brief History of the Human Condition&quot;,
  there is a description of how important cooperation is for humans, and how it has
  evolved and formed our species. I wish that this would have been the starting chapter
  of the book, because this story is in fact central to how moral and political philosophy
  should be restated.</p>

  <p>There are many thoughts and arguments in this book that invite discussion. Indeed,
  there are many that are not fully developed or joined together in a more coherent
  fashion. I leave the book with a sense of having seen glimpses of a new start for
  moral and political philosophy. But it is tentative, which is both good, since it
  opens the door for further development, and bad, since as it is, the account is
  too fragmented and does not form a sustained and complete argument.</p>

  '
isbn: '9780197658529'
language: en
lastmod: '2023-08-08'
path: /library/schmidtz-2023.html
published: '2023'
rating: 4
reference: Schmidtz 2023
reviewed: '2023-08-08'
subjects:
- enlightenment
- human-evolution
- liberalism
- morality
- political-philosophy
title: 'Living Together: Inventing Moral Science'
type: book
year: 2023