Intellectual Virtue and the Good Life: Ethical and Epistemic Values

哲学家通常将“伦理”理解为与行为有关的问题：我应该做什么，我应该如何行为，我应该如何生活？这些都是关于我们的“实际”生活的问题--我们作为行动者、实干者的生活。相比之下，“认识论”被理解为关注关于思想的问题：我应该相信什么，我应该如何推理，我能知道什么？这些都是关于我们的“智力”生活的问题--我们作为思考、形成信仰和观点以及获取知识的人的生活。哲学家们--从古希腊一直到今天--都在谈论一种似乎既属于伦理学又属于认识论的观念：“智力美德”观念。要成功地讨论“智慧的美德”，需要将这两个有时被分开的哲学探究领域结合在一起。“智力美德”的定义本身是有争议的；哲学家们在智力美德的清单上包括了谦逊和开明等性格特征，实践智慧等技能或能力，以及感知和直觉等能力。亚里士多德在他的《尼科马可伦理学》中专门用了一章来阐述智慧的美德，捍卫洞察力、科学理解和实践智慧对过上美好生活的重要性。在当代认识论中，许多人敦促对诸如开放思想、谦逊和智力正直这样的性格特征进行审查。洞察力、科学理解力、实践智慧、开明胸怀、谦逊、智慧正直--这些听起来都是好事。我的研究问道：是什么让这些“智力美德”变好了？为什么它们有价值？我们为什么要拥有这些美德呢？是不是因为这些美德会让我们快乐？因为这会让我们成为更好的人？因为这将使我们在一个自由的社会中成为更好的公民？或者，这些美德的价值--就像一些哲学家所说的那样--源自一种特殊的“智力”或“认知”价值领域？许多哲学家认为这样一个价值领域的想法有意义吗？我对这些问题的看法结合了多种哲学方法。首先，要弄清楚哲学家们所说的“智力美德”是什么意思(以及曾经是什么意思)，还有很多工作要做。其次，在哲学伦理学中，有一些论点有待探索，挑战连贯性和智力完整性等美德的价值。例如，有些情况下最好是语无伦次--比如当你在对不同价值观的忠诚之间左右为难时。第三，心理学家发现，当谈到“智力”性格特征时，个体之间存在着巨大的差异--例如，在人们的偏见程度上。我的项目将通过与心理学家的合作，探索这些差异以及与人格和心理健康的潜在相关性。我项目的一部分旨在将我的研究成果传播给非学术受众，特别是教育工作者和教育政策制定者。关于教育的功能(在所有层面上)，有一个重要的辩论：它的主要功能是灌输事实或理论知识(正如有时所说的那样)，还是具有促进和发展某些有价值的性格特征、技能和能力--简而言之，智力美德--的同等重要的功能。智力美德的性质和价值与这个问题相关：例如，如果智力谦逊对于过上美好的人类生活是必不可少的，那么可能有责任在教育中培养这种美德。我的目标是与教育家和教育哲学家接触，作为我项目的一部分，既为我的研究提供信息，也为学院外从事教育工作的人提供潜在有用的新框架和概念。

Philosophers typically understand "ethics" as concerned with questions about conduct: what should I do, how should I behave, how should I live? These are questions about our "practical" lives - our lives as people who act, who do things. "Epistemology," by contrast, is understood to concern questions about thought: what I should I believe, how should I reason, what can I know? These are questions about our "intellectual" lives - our lives as people who think, form beliefs and opinions, and acquire knowledge. Philosophers - going back to ancient Greece, and up to the present day - have talked about an idea that seems to belong both to ethics and to epistemology: the idea of "intellectual virtue." A successful discussion of "intellectual virtue" requires bringing these two areas of philosophical inquiry, which are sometimes kept separate, together. The definition of "intellectual virtue" itself is controversial; philosophers have included, on lists of intellectual virtues, such character traits as humility and openmindedness, skills or abilities such as practical wisdom, and faculties such as perception and intuition. Aristotle devoted a chapter of his Nicomachean Ethics to the intellectual virtues, defending the importance of insight, scientific understanding, and practical wisdom for living a good life. In contemporary epistemology, many have urged an examination of such character traits as openmindedness, humility, and intellectual integrity. Insight, scientific understanding, practical wisdom, openmindedness, humility, intellectual integrity - these all sound like good things. My research asks: what makes these "intellectual virtues" good, why are they valuable? Why should we want to have these virtues? Is it because these virtues will make us happy? Because it will make us better people? Because it will make us better citizens in a liberal society? Or does the value of these virtues derive -- as some philosophers argue -- from a special "intellectual" or "epistemic" domain of value? Does the idea of such a domain of value, assumed by many philosophers, even make sense? My approach to these questions combines a variety of philosophical methods. First, there is work to be done getting clear what philosophers mean (and have meant) by "intellectual virtue." Second, there are arguments to be explored in philosophical ethics, challenging the value of such virtues as coherence and intellectual integrity. A case can be made, for example, that there are situations where it is better to be incoherent - as when you are torn between allegiance to diverse values. Third, psychologists have found that there are substantial differences between individuals when it comes to their "intellectual" character traits - e.g. in the extent to which people are biased. My project will explore these differences and potential correlations with personality and mental health, through collaboration with psychologists. Part of my project aims to disseminate the results of my research to a non-academic audience, and in particular educators and education policymakers. There is an important debate to be had about the function of education (at all levels): whether its primary function is to instill factual or theoretical knowledge (as is sometimes suggests), or whether it has an equally important function of promoting and developing certain valuable character traits, skills, and abilities - in short, the intellectual virtues. The nature and value of the intellectual virtues is relevant to this question: if, for example, intellectual humility is essential for living a good human life, then there might be a responsibility to foster such a virtue in education. I aim to engage with educators and philosophers of education as part of my project, both to inform my research and to provide potentially useful new frameworks and concepts for those working in education outside the academy.