The ethicist will see you now. You had questions?
“My stepdad has Alzheimer’s. Can my mom date someone else?”
“My boyfriend says he’d save our cat but not a stranger if both were drowning. Is that wrong?”
“My mother-in-law hasn’t saved for retirement. Are we on the hook?”
These were the three questions a packed crowd at an engaging Live! At the Library event last week picked to see what Kwame Anthony Appiah — author of The Ethicist column for the New York Times Magazine and 2024 winner of the Library’s John W. Kluge Prize for Achievement in the Study of Humanity — would have to say. (The hourlong discussion is surprisingly funny.)
The audience-participation evening was a treat, as Appiah, 71, has spent a lifetime cultivating an international perspective on philosophical issues as they relate to ethics, linguistics, nationality and race. He’s written more than a dozen books and is the Silver professor of philosophy and law at New York University. Raised mostly in his father’s native Ghana and educated at Cambridge University in his mother’s native England, he has for decades enjoyed a reputation as one of the world’s foremost thinkers.
“I think about the role of philosophers in our society in terms of giving people tools to thinking about their lives,” Appiah told the crowd in the Coolidge Auditorium. “It’s very definitely not about telling people what to do. That’s not my view of what philosophers are for. Everybody’s in charge of their own life. Everybody has to figure out how to live their life. And it’s a hard job. It’s good to have some help.”
So, that mom who wants to go out dating, even though her children are mortified, particularly by the fact the man she wants to date seems to be a problematic loser? The audience, before hearing Appiah’s advice, could pick between three answers: “No, this would be a betrayal;” “Yes, her dating should not be your concern;” and “Yes, it’s morally acceptable to date. But, yikes, this guy calls for an intervention!”
Appiah agreed with the 55% who voted for the third option. The spousal obligations to care for the incapacitated partner continues, he said, but not to the extent to prevent them from having an intimate relationship. The second part of the question — the character of mom’s love interest — was tricky, too.
“Just as children are not very grateful usually when their parents tell them that they’ve got the wrong partners, parents are often not very grateful when their children tell them they’ve got the wrong partners,” he said. This drew a huge laugh.
His best advice: “It’s fine to tell your parents — because you love them — you think they’re making a mistake … but if you’ve sort of tried and they don’t take it, you’re just going to have to accept that it is still their life.”
The answers to the other questions followed the same reasoned logic, while still recognizing life’s inherent pains and difficulties.
Save the cat or the stranger?
The human life is ultimately more important than the cat’s, though all life is valuable. People have more widely interconnected lives and responsibilities to others, Appiah reasoned. (Plus, a reality check: Would the cat-loving boyfriend actually watch a person drown while swimming to his cat?)
Mother-in-law who won’t save for retirement?
Exactly 70% of the audience voted for this answer: “… you have at least a responsibility to help in a limited way.”
Appiah concurred, saying that perhaps the best advice is to offer to pay for the parent to see a professional financial adviser, so that the interpersonal dynamics are removed.
“If she does end up needing some help,” he said, “you should at least be willing to offer it.”
Subscribe to the blog— it’s free!