a little philosophy joke.

[Douglas Holm]

Thank you!  You've satisfied a curiosity I've had since a philosophy major told me the anecdote in 1989, claiming that he read about it in a NYTimes magazine article.  

> On Mar 14, 2016, at 8:37 PM, Danny Weltman <danny.weltman at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> That one's traditionally (and dubiously) attributed to Sidney Morgenbesser, who is the source of most of philosophy's great funny stories. See here:
> 
> http://crookedtimber.org/2004/08/03/sidney-morgenbesser/
> 
> http://jrbenjamin.com/2013/10/10/sidney-morgenbessers-sense-of-humor/
> 
>> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 8:12 PM, Douglas Holm <dkholm at mac.com> wrote:
>> There is also the famous sarcastic "Yeah, yeah!" call from the audience deflating the philosophy prof speaker's notion that one cannot utter a negative with two "positive" words.  Can't remember the people involved, though I think the anecdote is true and not an academic legend.  
>> 
>>> On Mar 14, 2016, at 8:02 PM, Danny Weltman <danny.weltman at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> The joke is obscure at best, and to appreciate the full hilarity you've got to be steeped in contemporary Anglo-American philosophy (Jerry Fodor, the guy from whom the joke is taken, is a preeminent philosopher). In case anyone wants the frog dissected:
>>> 
>>> The basic punchline is that the heckler has failed to consider "naive realism," which is pretty much the most basic view in the entire world. Anyone who isn't a philosopher is almost certainly a naive realist, because why WOULDN'T things be generally as they appear to be? One has to be a philosopher or similarly deranged to think otherwise. The history of philosophy is filled with views like idealism (everything exists as ideas in our heads, and in God's head, not as actual objects) and other wacky stuff, and the heckler is so focused on all those obscure philosophical views that they have neglected what's right in front of them.
>>> 
>>> The other source of hilarity for the joke is conventions in philosophy. Philosophy is a very predatory sort of field - lots of people treat it like one big contest or one big argument, with the idea being that you pounce upon any weakness in your interlocutor's position and tear them apart (this is what Socrates spent his days doing). So, every philosopher has had the experience of someone who's "got your number," so to speak, while you're giving a talk. Sometimes it feels like the entire audience has got your number. In the joke this is pushed to the point of hilarity, because the heckler is objecting after the first sentence of the talk (traditionally you're supposed to wait until the end of the talk to raise your objection, because it might be covered at some point if you just sit tight and let the speaker finish).
>>> 
>>> We could make the same joke outside the context of philosophy: Once upon a time, a visiting linguist presented a lecture on the topic: ‘How many ways are there to greet people in principle?’ ‘In principle,’ he began, ‘there are exactly 12 ways to greet people.' A voice called from the audience: ‘Thirteen.’ ‘There are,’ the lecturer repeated, ‘exactly 12 possible ways to greet people; not one less and not one more.’ ‘Thirteen,’ the voice from the audience called again. ‘Very well, then,’ said the lecturer, now perceptibly irked, ‘I shall proceed to enumerate the 12 possible ways to greet people. The first is to say hello.’ ‘Oh,’ said the voice from the audience. Then ‘Fourteen!’
>>> 
>>> It's less funny, because it's missing the context of philosophers being assholes to each other in an effort to emulate Socrates, but you can probably get the gist.
>>> 
>>>> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 6:37 PM, Robert Mahnke <rpmahnke at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> i don't get it
>>>> 
>>>>> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 4:17 AM, Keith Davis <kbob42 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Perfect...
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 5:30 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> I will tell you a philosophical joke. Once upon a time, a visiting scholar presented a lecture on the topic: ‘How many philosophical positions are there in principle?’ ‘In principle,’ he began, ‘there are exactly 12 philosophical positions.’ A voice called from the audience: ‘Thirteen.’ ‘There are,’ the lecturer repeated, ‘exactly 12 possible philosophical positions; not one less and not one more.’ ‘Thirteen,’ the voice from the audience called again. ‘Very well, then,’ said the lecturer, now perceptibly irked, ‘I shall proceed to enumerate the 12 possible philosophical positions. The first is sometimes called “naive realism”. It is the view according to which things are, by and large, very much the way that they seem to be.’ ‘Oh,’ said the voice from the audience. Then ‘Fourteen!’
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> www.innergroovemusic.com
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20160314/2a79ee53/attachment.html>