BRINGING PHILOSOPHY TO LIFE #18:
The Art of Democracy
The news report that generated this episode is taken from the Associated Press: “Hollywood actors are joining screenwriters in the first dual strike from the two unions in more than six decades, with huge consequences for the film and television industry.” That AP story explains that the screenwriters and actors are on strike for two major reasons. The first is financial. Actors who have appeared on popular television programs have expected royalty checks when the show appeared in reruns, even if they participated only once. When the distribution of film and video was changed to the streaming model, that payment system mostly disappeared. Actors want to regain a long-term share of that revenue. “This issue is only one of many the actors have in common with writers. For both scribes and performers, the move to streaming and its ripple effects have also meant shorter seasons of shows with longer gaps between them, and therefore less work. They say inflation is outpacing the scheduled pay bumps in their contracts.” The second reason is that both writers and actors fear the threat of unregulated use of artificial intelligence. The actors say studios want to be able to use their likenesses without having to hire them, or pay them” (Andrew Dalton, The Associated Press, July 14, 2023).
The economic issues related to the current Hollywood strike are important, especially because they feature a struggle between two major labor unions and some of the largest corporations. The current strike seems to show the current strength of labor unions in the U.S., possibly a resurgence of their power. The philosophical question of distributive justice, explored by thinkers such as Plato, Aristotle, and John Rawls, has major implications for democracy. I will reserve that topic for a future episode. In Episodes 14, 15, and 16 of this series I focused on the pervasive role of Artificial Intelligence as it relates to the current threats to democracy, so it comes as no surprise that the Hollywood screenwriters and actors are deeply concerned about “the unregulated use of artificial intelligence.” The expanding use of ChatGPT is a clear threat to the artists who write, perform, and implement the media that shape the worldview of all members of contemporary society, regardless of their age. The nightmare that is emerging shifts the creative process from actual human beings to the virtual realm that is, indeed, “unregulated.”
The economic marketplace will surely be important in this process, but recent global developments show that political power easily becomes an end in itself, often used for purposes that have nothing to do with the common good. Bullies and narcissistic rulers thrive on using their influence for what they take to be their own interest, which is often destructive to the kind of democracy that is the topic of this series. Creating, shaping, and controlling the lives of others quickly becomes the primary agenda for tyrants, no matter where they operate. Governments, especially those that have formidable police and military power, are the most visible structures where tyrants rule, but they are also attracted by other organizations that are important for human civilization, including business corporations, religious organizations, schools, colleges and universities, laboratories, and medical facilities.
What role do the arts play in shaping our ways of thinking about ourselves and our world? This issue is especially important as we assess the nature of democracy and its viability. The popular arts—such as television shows, movies, musical concerts, and dance performances —pervade human culture wherever it exists. This is not a new development, but the contemporary media, especially the electronic forms, have expanded the influence of the arts on our lives because of their widespread dispersion and popularity throughout the world.
The current “culture wars” being conducted by some politicians pretend that culture can and should be decreed and implemented simply through passing laws and enforcing them. But what about the feelings, emotions, attitudes, passions, and values that shape our worldview? Those factors are fundamental. Choosing whether to be progressive, conservative, or indifferent in the political realm depends on our moral, aesthetic, and religious values as well as the overall state of our psyche. Our political and legal views are a result of these more fundamental forces, not their primary cause. In this episode, I will look at the function of the arts in general and at the specific question of the kind of art that promotes and nurtures democracy.
In the contemporary world, the American philosopher John Dewey stands out as a thinker who connected fundamental principles with democracy. He is widely known for his ideas about primary education and how to promote autonomy in learning. In Episode #3, I cited Dewey’s role in helping develop the 1940 Statement of Academic Freedom and Tenure for the American Association of University Professors, an essential part of our democracy. In developing an aesthetic theory appropriate for democracy, Dewey’s central contribution was his book Art as Experience. One important theme in Dewey’s theory of the arts is the importance of connecting art and life as opposed to the tendency to separate the fine arts from the practical arts and create a dualism that undermines the vital place of the arts in civilization. He says: “As long as art is the beauty parlor of civilization, neither art nor civilization is secure” (John Dewey, Art as Experience, 1934).
The target of Dewey’s attack is the view of the arts that remove them from our daily lives and lock them into museums, place them in precious settings such as opera and symphony concerts and theater performances with expensive seats, and chamber music confined to royal palaces and the living rooms of mansions. Leo Tolstoy, in his book What is Art? that was published in 1899, provides a similar critique, insisting that “beauty” is not the primary subject of art but that art is grounded in an essential human activity—sharing our feelings with other members of the human community. Dewey builds on that idea by broadening it into the sharing of experience by using the creative process to produce what he calls “an experience.” According to Dewey, what distinguishes “an experience” is that “it has a unity that gives it its name, that meal, that storm, that rupture of friendship. The existence of this unity is constituted by a single quality that pervades the entire experience despite the variation of its constituent parts” (Dewey, Art as Experience, Chapter 3). “The arts which today have the most vitality for the average person are things . . . [we] do not take to be arts: for instance, the movie, jazzed music, the comic strip” (Dewey, Art as Experience, Chapter 1). Since Dewey wrote those words, those media are readily included among objects and experiences that are available to all.
The Boston Symphony provides an excellent example of taking music out of “the beauty parlor” and making it available in a beautiful natural setting. Since 1937, Tanglewood—located in in Lenox, Massachusetts near the Stockbridge Bowl—has been the summer home of the BSO. Seats are available in The Shed, but the performances are also available at a much-reduced price on The Lawn where the audience is welcome to bring their own chairs and enjoy a picnic. In additional to Classical music, including new compositions commissioned specifically for performance in that location, popular music is also part of the program. Especially appropriate for American democracy, on the Fourth of July James Taylor sings and plays guitar to a huge audience of all ages. He is not the only representative of popular culture at Tanglewood. As I was writing this episode, the New York Times reported the death of Tony Bennett, who also performed often at Tanglewood. Here is an excerpt from his obituary in Times: “Tony Bennett, a singer whose melodic clarity, jazz-influenced phrasing, audience-embracing persona and warm, deceptively simple interpretations of musical standards helped spread the American songbook around the world and won him generations of fans, died on Friday at his home of many decades in Manhattan. He was 96 years old” (The New York Times, July 21, 2023). In 2015, Bennett performed at Tanglewood with Lady Gaga, demonstrating his ability to connect diverse generations through music.
Now let’s return to the current Hollywood strike. The “unregulated use of artificial intelligence” is a threat to art and to democracy because it not only promotes the separation of art and artists from everyday life but also from life itself. Consider a nightmare scenario that uses a form of AI such as ChatGPT to reduce or even eliminate human beings such as actors, screenwriters, visual artists, and musicians from the process. If the sole purpose of movies and videos is to generate income for the people who own the studios and the distribution networks, nothing important would be lost as long as profits expand. So far, that has not happened, but every day brings new reports of what has been accomplished and of what is being developed. What, in principle, could stop that unregulated process?
To test this scenario, I will consider two current Hollywood movies that have recently set box office records: Christopher Nolan’s Oppenheimer and Greta Gerwig’s Barbie. The economic success of these two films is clear: On July 24, The Washington Post reported that on a single weekend Oppenheimer earned $80.5 million and Barbie earned $155 million, the most ever for a movie directed by a woman. If the only goal is to make money, then amusing and entertaining might be enough to expect from a movie or any other work of art. But if works of art are also able to play a vital role in promoting the common good, especially in a democracy, then simply amusing and entertaining is not enough. I suggest that the arts are like journalism, which employs a variety of media such as newspapers, radio and television broadcasts, and the Internet as part of an expanded version of “the fourth estate.” Both as documentaries and as works of fiction, movies and videos have an important part in shaping our understanding of ourselves and of our culture.
Let’s begin with Oppenheimer. Christopher Nolan’s new movie joins a long list of documentaries and fictional films that present not only Robert Oppenheimer’s part in developing atomic bombs (two of which were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan in 1945) but also his personal political struggle during and after World War 2 that resulted in Oppenheimer’s losing his security clearance. This film poses several issues that are both current and vital to the future not only of democracy but of humanity. Since the invasion of Ukraine by Russia on February 24, 2022, Vladimir Putin and other members of his government have threatened to use nuclear weapons in that conflict. The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, founded by Albert Einstein and The University of Chicago, recently issued an update concerning our proximity to global nuclear war. Here is their latest statement:
This year, the Science and Security Board of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists moves the hands of the Doomsday Clock forward, largely (though not exclusively) because of the mounting dangers of the war in Ukraine. The Clock now stands at 90 seconds to midnight—the closest to global catastrophe it has ever been (January 24, 2023).
In Nolan’s film, Oppenheimer and Einstein are shown together more than once— during the War and afterward at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, New Jersey. They both contributed to creating the atomic bomb, Einstein to the theory and Oppenheimer primarily to its physical realization. The question of moral responsibility for bringing atomic weapons into existence is central to this film, especially from Oppenheimer’s perspective. One memorable scene shows Oppenheimer in conversation with President Truman concerning Oppenheimer’s feelings of guilt because he brought the atomic bomb into existence. Truman is brutal in that scene, reminding Oppenheimer that it was he, the Commander in Chief, who made the decision to drop the bomb, not Oppenheimer. Truman told his staff never again to admit that “crybaby” to his office.
Moral questions of this sort, as Aristotle claimed in The Poetics, are what we can expect in works of art. Unlike history—which Aristotle said is concerned with what has happened—the arts, especially theater, film, literature, and poetry, are primarily concerned with what might happen according to what is probable or necessary (Aristotle’s Poetics, 1451a) and what should happen (Aristotle’s Poetics, 1460b). The issue of using nuclear weapons is even more urgent today than it was during the period when the atomic bomb was developed at Los Alamos when Oppenheimer explored the question with Einstein and Edward Teller. They were warned of a possible chain reaction caused by exploding the bomb that might spread throughout the atmosphere and destroy the entire globe. Teller said that the probability was close to zero. That is not true now. The chances of a misjudgment or miscommunication in the face of such threats are terrifying. The popularity of Nolan’s film provides a new opportunity for all of us, especially those who believe in democracy, to enter this dialogue and demand effective action before it too late. This is only one of the things we should expect from the scriptwriters, actors, and other artists who make such films in Hollywood or anywhere else.
Works of art do not interpret or evaluate themselves. It is the responsibility not only of professional critics but of every member of the audience to determine the meaning as well as the importance and overall value of art works. In the case of Greta Gerwig’s Barbie, the first critical task is to explore its meaning. At first glance, this movie appears to be entertaining and amusing, especially for young children. This film is not for young children. I had no intention of buying a ticket when I passed the theater where it was being shown on my way to see Oppenheimer. Then I listened to Michael Moore’s preliminary review of Barbie that he published on Substack (July 31, 2023). I quickly changed my mind. In his most recent episode, Moore says: “It is the best film I’ve seen this year; it may well be the best film I’ve seen in the last five years, maybe . . . but it’s certainly the best satire that I’ve seen since Monty Python’s Life of Brian . . .” Moore calls this “a brave and courageous film” because (1) it is a feminist take on the Barbie story, (2) it “eviscerates capitalism,” (3) it attacks the rise of authoritarianism and fascism, and (4) pummels the Patriarchy. Moore leaves us with this question: “How did she get away with this?” Moore defers a detailed analysis of Barbie until his audience has a chance to see the film. I will follow his lead.
My interest is not in film criticism but in the philosophical issues that underlie major current events. Some of the questions posed by the changing of gender roles in our day are philosophical in nature. Although issues connected with the LGBTQ+ movement tend to dominate the headlines because of the current “culture wars” in the political sphere, the broader ethical and existential concerns related to all genders have been central to philosophical inquiry at least since Plato wrote The Republic. In a later episode, I will return to Barbie and connect the content of that film with Plato’s Republic and some other philosophical reflections on human identity in both its individual and social manifestations.
Finally, both Nolan’s tragedy and Gerwig’s comedy show how important it is to have living, breathing human beings write scripts, act, and create the other aspects of works of art not only in Hollywood but everywhere. Artificial Intelligence is a useful tool that, when properly used, can help us develop the next stage of human civilization. However, ChatGPT and every other technology must be regulated by beings that are able not only to calculate but also to feel, to care, to love, and to will for the sake of the common good. If we wish to have a democracy, it is impossible to relegate the arts to AI.
Episode #18
Episode #18
Episode #18
BRINGING PHILOSOPHY TO LIFE #18: The Art of Democracy The news report that generated this episode is taken from the Associated Press: “Hollywood actors are joining screenwriters in the first dual strike from the two unions in more than six decades, with huge consequences for the film and television industry.” That AP story explains that the screenwriters and actors are on strike for two major reasons. The first is financial. Actors who have appeared on popular television programs have expected royalty checks when the show appeared in reruns, even if they participated only once. When the distribution of film and video was changed to the streaming model, that payment system mostly disappeared. Actors want to regain a long-term share of that revenue. “This issue is only one of many the actors have in common with writers. For both scribes and performers, the move to streaming and its ripple effects have also meant shorter seasons of shows with longer gaps between them, and therefore less work. They say inflation is outpacing the scheduled pay bumps in their contracts.” The second reason is that both writers and actors fear the threat of unregulated use of artificial intelligence. The actors say studios want to be able to use their likenesses without having to hire them, or pay them” (Andrew Dalton, The Associated Press, July 14, 2023). The economic issues related to the current Hollywood strike are important, especially because they feature a struggle between two major labor unions and some of the largest corporations. The current strike seems to show the current strength of labor unions in the U.S., possibly a resurgence of their power. The philosophical question of distributive justice, explored by thinkers such as Plato, Aristotle, and John Rawls, has major implications for democracy. I will reserve that topic for a future episode. In Episodes 14, 15, and 16 of this series I focused on the pervasive role of Artificial Intelligence as it relates to the current threats to democracy, so it comes as no surprise that the Hollywood screenwriters and actors are deeply concerned about “the unregulated use of artificial intelligence.” The expanding use of ChatGPT is a clear threat to the artists who write, perform, and implement the media that shape the worldview of all members of contemporary society, regardless of their age. The nightmare that is emerging shifts the creative process from actual human beings to the virtual realm that is, indeed, “unregulated.” The economic marketplace will surely be important in this process, but recent global developments show that political power easily becomes an end in itself, often used for purposes that have nothing to do with the common good. Bullies and narcissistic rulers thrive on using their influence for what they take to be their own interest, which is often destructive to the kind of democracy that is the topic of this series. Creating, shaping, and controlling the lives of others quickly becomes the primary agenda for tyrants, no matter where they operate. Governments, especially those that have formidable police and military power, are the most visible structures where tyrants rule, but they are also attracted by other organizations that are important for human civilization, including business corporations, religious organizations, schools, colleges and universities, laboratories, and medical facilities. What role do the arts play in shaping our ways of thinking about ourselves and our world? This issue is especially important as we assess the nature of democracy and its viability. The popular arts—such as television shows, movies, musical concerts, and dance performances —pervade human culture wherever it exists. This is not a new development, but the contemporary media, especially the electronic forms, have expanded the influence of the arts on our lives because of their widespread dispersion and popularity throughout the world. The current “culture wars” being conducted by some politicians pretend that culture can and should be decreed and implemented simply through passing laws and enforcing them. But what about the feelings, emotions, attitudes, passions, and values that shape our worldview? Those factors are fundamental. Choosing whether to be progressive, conservative, or indifferent in the political realm depends on our moral, aesthetic, and religious values as well as the overall state of our psyche. Our political and legal views are a result of these more fundamental forces, not their primary cause. In this episode, I will look at the function of the arts in general and at the specific question of the kind of art that promotes and nurtures democracy. In the contemporary world, the American philosopher John Dewey stands out as a thinker who connected fundamental principles with democracy. He is widely known for his ideas about primary education and how to promote autonomy in learning. In Episode #3, I cited Dewey’s role in helping develop the 1940 Statement of Academic Freedom and Tenure for the American Association of University Professors, an essential part of our democracy. In developing an aesthetic theory appropriate for democracy, Dewey’s central contribution was his book Art as Experience. One important theme in Dewey’s theory of the arts is the importance of connecting art and life as opposed to the tendency to separate the fine arts from the practical arts and create a dualism that undermines the vital place of the arts in civilization. He says: “As long as art is the beauty parlor of civilization, neither art nor civilization is secure” (John Dewey, Art as Experience, 1934). The target of Dewey’s attack is the view of the arts that remove them from our daily lives and lock them into museums, place them in precious settings such as opera and symphony concerts and theater performances with expensive seats, and chamber music confined to royal palaces and the living rooms of mansions. Leo Tolstoy, in his book What is Art? that was published in 1899, provides a similar critique, insisting that “beauty” is not the primary subject of art but that art is grounded in an essential human activity—sharing our feelings with other members of the human community. Dewey builds on that idea by broadening it into the sharing of experience by using the creative process to produce what he calls “an experience.” According to Dewey, what distinguishes “an experience” is that “it has a unity that gives it its name, that meal, that storm, that rupture of friendship. The existence of this unity is constituted by a single quality that pervades the entire experience despite the variation of its constituent parts” (Dewey, Art as Experience, Chapter 3). “The arts which today have the most vitality for the average person are things . . . [we] do not take to be arts: for instance, the movie, jazzed music, the comic strip” (Dewey, Art as Experience, Chapter 1). Since Dewey wrote those words, those media are readily included among objects and experiences that are available to all. The Boston Symphony provides an excellent example of taking music out of “the beauty parlor” and making it available in a beautiful natural setting. Since 1937, Tanglewood—located in in Lenox, Massachusetts near the Stockbridge Bowl—has been the summer home of the BSO. Seats are available in The Shed, but the performances are also available at a much-reduced price on The Lawn where the audience is welcome to bring their own chairs and enjoy a picnic. In additional to Classical music, including new compositions commissioned specifically for performance in that location, popular music is also part of the program. Especially appropriate for American democracy, on the Fourth of July James Taylor sings and plays guitar to a huge audience of all ages. He is not the only representative of popular culture at Tanglewood. As I was writing this episode, the New York Times reported the death of Tony Bennett, who also performed often at Tanglewood. Here is an excerpt from his obituary in Times: “Tony Bennett, a singer whose melodic clarity, jazz-influenced phrasing, audience-embracing persona and warm, deceptively simple interpretations of musical standards helped spread the American songbook around the world and won him generations of fans, died on Friday at his home of many decades in Manhattan. He was 96 years old” (The New York Times, July 21, 2023). In 2015, Bennett performed at Tanglewood with Lady Gaga, demonstrating his ability to connect diverse generations through music. Now let’s return to the current Hollywood strike. The “unregulated use of artificial intelligence” is a threat to art and to democracy because it not only promotes the separation of art and artists from everyday life but also from life itself. Consider a nightmare scenario that uses a form of AI such as ChatGPT to reduce or even eliminate human beings such as actors, screenwriters, visual artists, and musicians from the process. If the sole purpose of movies and videos is to generate income for the people who own the studios and the distribution networks, nothing important would be lost as long as profits expand. So far, that has not happened, but every day brings new reports of what has been accomplished and of what is being developed. What, in principle, could stop that unregulated process? To test this scenario, I will consider two current Hollywood movies that have recently set box office records: Christopher Nolan’s Oppenheimer and Greta Gerwig’s Barbie. The economic success of these two films is clear: On July 24, The Washington Post reported that on a single weekend Oppenheimer earned $80.5 million and Barbie earned $155 million, the most ever for a movie directed by a woman. If the only goal is to make money, then amusing and entertaining might be enough to expect from a movie or any other work of art. But if works of art are also able to play a vital role in promoting the common good, especially in a democracy, then simply amusing and entertaining is not enough. I suggest that the arts are like journalism, which employs a variety of media such as newspapers, radio and television broadcasts, and the Internet as part of an expanded version of “the fourth estate.” Both as documentaries and as works of fiction, movies and videos have an important part in shaping our understanding of ourselves and of our culture. Let’s begin with Oppenheimer. Christopher Nolan’s new movie joins a long list of documentaries and fictional films that present not only Robert Oppenheimer’s part in developing atomic bombs (two of which were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan in 1945) but also his personal political struggle during and after World War 2 that resulted in Oppenheimer’s losing his security clearance. This film poses several issues that are both current and vital to the future not only of democracy but of humanity. Since the invasion of Ukraine by Russia on February 24, 2022, Vladimir Putin and other members of his government have threatened to use nuclear weapons in that conflict. The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, founded by Albert Einstein and The University of Chicago, recently issued an update concerning our proximity to global nuclear war. Here is their latest statement: This year, the Science and Security Board of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists moves the hands of the Doomsday Clock forward, largely (though not exclusively) because of the mounting dangers of the war in Ukraine. The Clock now stands at 90 seconds to midnight—the closest to global catastrophe it has ever been (January 24, 2023). In Nolan’s film, Oppenheimer and Einstein are shown together more than once— during the War and afterward at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, New Jersey. They both contributed to creating the atomic bomb, Einstein to the theory and Oppenheimer primarily to its physical realization. The question of moral responsibility for bringing atomic weapons into existence is central to this film, especially from Oppenheimer’s perspective. One memorable scene shows Oppenheimer in conversation with President Truman concerning Oppenheimer’s feelings of guilt because he brought the atomic bomb into existence. Truman is brutal in that scene, reminding Oppenheimer that it was he, the Commander in Chief, who made the decision to drop the bomb, not Oppenheimer. Truman told his staff never again to admit that “crybaby” to his office. Moral questions of this sort, as Aristotle claimed in The Poetics, are what we can expect in works of art. Unlike history—which Aristotle said is concerned with what has happened—the arts, especially theater, film, literature, and poetry, are primarily concerned with what might happen according to what is probable or necessary (Aristotle’s Poetics, 1451a) and what should happen (Aristotle’s Poetics, 1460b). The issue of using nuclear weapons is even more urgent today than it was during the period when the atomic bomb was developed at Los Alamos when Oppenheimer explored the question with Einstein and Edward Teller. They were warned of a possible chain reaction caused by exploding the bomb that might spread throughout the atmosphere and destroy the entire globe. Teller said that the probability was close to zero. That is not true now. The chances of a misjudgment or miscommunication in the face of such threats are terrifying. The popularity of Nolan’s film provides a new opportunity for all of us, especially those who believe in democracy, to enter this dialogue and demand effective action before it too late. This is only one of the things we should expect from the scriptwriters, actors, and other artists who make such films in Hollywood or anywhere else. Works of art do not interpret or evaluate themselves. It is the responsibility not only of professional critics but of every member of the audience to determine the meaning as well as the importance and overall value of art works. In the case of Greta Gerwig’s Barbie, the first critical task is to explore its meaning. At first glance, this movie appears to be entertaining and amusing, especially for young children. This film is not for young children. I had no intention of buying a ticket when I passed the theater where it was being shown on my way to see Oppenheimer. Then I listened to Michael Moore’s preliminary review of Barbie that he published on Substack (July 31, 2023). I quickly changed my mind. In his most recent episode, Moore says: “It is the best film I’ve seen this year; it may well be the best film I’ve seen in the last five years, maybe . . . but it’s certainly the best satire that I’ve seen since Monty Python’s Life of Brian . . .” Moore calls this “a brave and courageous film” because (1) it is a feminist take on the Barbie story, (2) it “eviscerates capitalism,” (3) it attacks the rise of authoritarianism and fascism, and (4) pummels the Patriarchy. Moore leaves us with this question: “How did she get away with this?” Moore defers a detailed analysis of Barbie until his audience has a chance to see the film. I will follow his lead. My interest is not in film criticism but in the philosophical issues that underlie major current events. Some of the questions posed by the changing of gender roles in our day are philosophical in nature. Although issues connected with the LGBTQ+ movement tend to dominate the headlines because of the current “culture wars” in the political sphere, the broader ethical and existential concerns related to all genders have been central to philosophical inquiry at least since Plato wrote The Republic. In a later episode, I will return to Barbie and connect the content of that film with Plato’s Republic and some other philosophical reflections on human identity in both its individual and social manifestations. Finally, both Nolan’s tragedy and Gerwig’s comedy show how important it is to have living, breathing human beings write scripts, act, and create the other aspects of works of art not only in Hollywood but everywhere. Artificial Intelligence is a useful tool that, when properly used, can help us develop the next stage of human civilization. However, ChatGPT and every other technology must be regulated by beings that are able not only to calculate but also to feel, to care, to love, and to will for the sake of the common good. If we wish to have a democracy, it is impossible to relegate the arts to AI.