Morris Ginsberg
This article includes a list of general references, but it lacks sufficient corresponding inline citations. (August 2008) |
Morris Ginsberg | |
---|---|
Born | 14 May 1889 Kelmy, Kovno, Lithuania |
Died | 31 August 1970 |
Alma mater | University College London |
Scientific career | |
Fields | Sociology |
Institutions | London School of Economics, University College London |
Morris Ginsberg
Biography
He was born in
At the age of thirteen he was sent away from home to
About this time there was a revival of Hebrew literature and an attempt was made by many Jewish writers to introduce the learning of the Western peoples to the Jews of Russia. It was in this way that he was brought into contact with European ideas and inspired with a great desire for secular knowledge.
His father had previously emigrated to
Eventually he obtained a post as a teacher in a small college at
At the London School of Economics his work was largely on sociology and political science. At the same time he continued his work in philosophy. He won the John Stuart Mill studentship three times in succession. Ginsberg incidentally acquired a good working knowledge of French and German, and outside his main sphere of studies, he took courses in biology, chemistry and physics. In 1914 he passed the MA examination with special distinction. His thesis consisted of a dissertation on the philosophy of Malebranche and was accompanied by a translation of his Discourses on Metaphysics (1923).
In the meantime he had been appointed Lecturer in Philosophy at University College London, where he gave courses on the history of
In 1921 he was reappointed Assistant at the London School of Economics, and full Lecturer in 1923. A year later he was appointed to the Readership in Sociology, being supported by recommendations from
His Sociology, written in 1934, was described by The Guardian in their obituary as "probably the best introduction to the subject ever written". (Guardian, 1 September 1970).
Main ideas
In his thesis on Malebranche, Ginsberg mainly argued against Mario Novaro's criticisms of Malebranche's theory of occasionalism, claiming that Novaro "entirely ignored the main difference between Hume and Malebranche in regard to causality. Malebranche does not, in truth, deny a necessary connection between cause and effect."[1]
Some of the major themes of his work were concerned with
1. The social responsibility of sociologists, which he saw as part of the more general problem of the ethics of knowledge. He believed that there was an urgent need to undertake fuller investigation of the relations between questions of fact and questions of value – particularly in the face of relativistic views that maintain that social conflicts have their origin in fundamental differences of moral outlook.
2. The second main theme is the question of what he called "Reason and Unreason" in human nature and society. He criticised the traditional view, widely propagated from Aristotle through Hume to Bertrand Russell, that the main functions of reason in human affairs lie in the clarification, systematisation and control of impulse and feeling, and the discovery of means to their fulfilment. He contended that reason and feeling should not be held to be in opposition, or reason as the slave of the passions, but that reason could play a significant role in motivating action and directing feeling and conation. He sums up his view as follows:
"We have not to choose between Hume's view of reason as the slave of the passions and Kant's view of it as independent and over-riding them. We may conceive of it rather as that in our personality which strives for integration, deeper than conscious thought, but the more effective the more it uses thought, working within and through the basic impulses and interests and deriving its energy from them".
~ from: "Is Reason the Slave of the Passions" – in The Plain View, Feb. 1955 [2]
Morris Ginsberg was continually preoccupied with examining the role of reason in ethics. His position on this has sometimes been misunderstood – occasionally strategically misunderstood. He charted and analysed the diversity of morals among societies, and between groups and individuals, but made a clear distinction between that recognition and assumption that ethics must be entirely relative. In consequence he was ready to take issue with those who propounded emotive theories of ethics, and those who were influenced, for example, by the work of
Ginsberg manifested an 'objectivist' theory of ethics in the tradition of
3. He was inevitably also concerned with the nature of Justice and its relationship to equality, and the associated question of Law as an increasingly important agent of social change and reform. The ethics of punishment and the complex nature of individual moral freedom and its involvement with legal compulsion is examined in "On Justice in Society" (1965), where he concludes as follows:- 'Three questions have to be asked (a) Is the use of force necessary or can the end aimed at be secured by suasion or voluntary agreement? (b) Can the end in question be attained by compulsion or does its value depend on its being freely or spontaneously pursued? These questions have to be faced in any effort to distinguish between the rights and duties which require and permit of legal reinforcement and rights and duties which are best assured by moral means; that is, by inner conviction and free acceptance.'
4. Another pervading theme in his work was the advocacy of the liberal disposition of mind as a desideratum. He opposed this to fanaticism, impulsiveness, 'totalitarianism'. He was for sanity, coolness, reflection and restraint in judgement. His approach to problems was fundamentally Apollonian, and he mistrusted the Dionysian temperament, though understanding its nature and its potency. As he said ("The Idea of Progress" 1953 pp 72–73) 'The liberal mind is characterised by an abhorrence of fanaticism, a greater readiness to count the cost in terms of human happiness and human lives, a profounder awareness of the effects of violence, both on those who employ it and those who suffer it.'
Works
- L. T. Hobhouse, Wheeler), (1915)
- The Psychology of Society, (1920)
- L. T. Hobhouse (with J. A. Hobson), (1931)
- Studies in Sociology, (1932)
- Sociology, (1934)
- Reason and unreason in society, (1947)
- 1923 Translation of Malebranche's Dialogues on Metaphysics and on Religion, The Macmillan Company
- Essays in Sociology and Social Philosophy (in three volumes): 1. On the Diversity of Morals, 2. , Reason and Unreason in Society, 3. Evolution and Progress, (1956)
See also
Footnotes
- ^ W. C. Swabey, review of Ginsberg's translation of the Dialogues on Metaphysics and on Religion by Nicholas Malebranche, in The Philosophical Review, Vol. 33, No. 2 (Mar. 1924), pp. 211–214 available on JSTOR (in English)
- ^ The Plain View; A Guide to Humanist Books in English (Summer 1955) Paperback – 1955 by Blackham HJ
References
- The above is adapted with permission from an address by E. M. Eppel given at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel in April 1991.