Even Aristotle wondered what philosophy was actually about. Suppose each special science- physics, biology, politics, say- was about a part of reality (or ‘Being’, as Aristotle would put it). It would appear that the sum of all these “partial” sciences would pretty much cover everything. What else is there for philosophy to study?
Overcoming partiality is not easy. As Boston Red Sox righthander John Smoltz walked off the Yankee Stadium mound with one out in the 4th inning Thursday, leaving the bases loaded and having surrendering 9 hits- 5 for extra bases, Yankees broadcaster Michael Kay said it was hard to watch someone once so great now pitching so poorly. But, he added, as a Yankee fan, happy to be up 5-3. ‘Partial’ means to consider the part, not the whole, and also to favor one party over another, and so lack objectivity. Forced to confront the totality of human experience from greatness to death, Kay retreated towards partiality; being partial towards the Yankee portion of the universe helped Michael Kay quell the anxiety of this existential moment. In a breath, Kay moved from the long view of the whole, the objectivity of the grand scheme of things, to the part- the brief moment of victory for Yankee favoritism and subjectivity.
Aristotle used this interesting little word, ‘qua’. It means ‘under the aspect of’. As in Kay, qua human, was scared to face death, but Kay, qua Yankee fan, was happy to see the Yankees up their lead in the A.L. East to 3.5 games. For Aristotle, biology studied Being qua living things, physics studied Being qua changing things. But the sum of all those aspects- all those ‘quas’- would pretty much covering everything. What would philosophy study?
Overcoming partiality is not easy. With Boston and New York still tied at one in the top of the 4th, the recently acquired Casey Kotchman lined a Joba Chamberlain anger-ball just over the right field fence for a patented New Yankee Stadium taxpayer funded homerun, giving the Sox what was to be a short-lived 3-1 lead. Kotchman’s first hit with the Sox had him suited to play the part in the rivalry, and one might suppose he had made his contribution to the totality for the day. But one inning is not a universe, and the Yankees quickly and viciously scored 8 runs in the bottom of the frame, sending the old lion Smoltz to the showers, and then beating up on lamb Billy Traber. But Chamberlain struggled in the 5th, walking the bases loaded on one out and then giving up an RBI single to Mike Lowell, which cut the lead to 9-4 and put the tying run in the on-deck circle. Kotchman again strode to the plate. And despite the three walks in the inning, Kotchman chased a first pitch fastball up and out of the zone. After taking a ball, he chased a letter high breaking ball, fouling it back for a 1-2 count, and then chased a slider in the dirt for strike 3. Chamberlain then whiffed the ethereal swinging Nick Green, retiring the side, and quelling the Yankee anxiety about another Boston comeback (as Kay, the canary in the coal mine of existential angst, asserted that Chamberlain was more relieved than pumped.) New York would add on in the bottom of the inning, on their way to a blowout, their first win in nine tries against Boston this year.
Kotchman’s praiseworthiness for his homerun does not ease his culpability for the eager self-destruction of his crucial K. The patience and selectivity of Red Sox hitters belies an objective, impartial approach to the strike zone; they don’t blurt out, in the words of little sister Kit Keller in “A League of Their Own”, “I like the high ones”, a subjective partiality for the unhittable. Yet that’s just what Kotchman did; his subjective ‘if I can see it I can hit it’ wildness displayed a partiality towards heroism and desire for glory. But at the expense of the whole (and valid inferences everywhere.) He had had his moment - the homerun- and he needed to take the long view, where pitch counts, walking the bases loaded, and a psychologically volatile young righthander are parts that need to be synthesized in the whole at-bat. The game turned on it.
Wondering as to whether the 42 year old future Hall of Famer John Smoltz would retire started immediately in the aftermath of his decrepit outing, and will only increase now that the Sox have designated Smoltz for assignment. But when being a baseball player has been one’s identity for one’s whole life, one is not merely partial towards the game. But retirement means relegating baseball to a mere part, an aspect, and finding a whole self apart from The Game. We will see if John Smoltz qua baseball player is ready to find John Smoltz qua something else.
Aristotle’s solution to the problem of the possibility of metaphysics was to say that philosophy- metaphysics- is the study of “Being qua Being.” (You can Google it.) But Being is not an aspect of itself. Instead, metaphysics is to look at Being- at Reality- simply as itself, as a whole. This is possible, Aristotle argues, only when one contrasts Being as something capable of existing independently, and so in virtue of itself, with Being when considered as something in relation to, and so dependent on, something else, the latter consisting of the partial view. It is existence, considered simply as a self-sufficient and independent whole that metaphysics- and philosophy- is about.
John Smoltz may feel that he depends on baseball, and that he is defined in relation to it, that there is only John Smoltz qua pitcher, not John Smoltz qua John Smoltz. But that relation frays and withers with the bite on the slider, and one cannot remain partial towards what is ultimately only a part of one’s life. The subjective desire to play cannot overwhelm the objective reality of the hanging curveball, and the plummet towards mortality it represents. Crash Davis in “Bull Durham” expressed it the final minute of the movie (spoiler alert), upon getting his release from the Durham ballclub, ending his baseball career: “right now I’m tired, and I don’t want to think about baseball, and I don’t want to think about Quantum Physics… I don’t want to think about nothing… I just want to be.”
partial eclipse photo here
[News of Smoltz' being DFA updated at 4:5o]
More on these topics:
All Men Are Mortal, Aristotle, Baseball Movies, Boston Red Sox, Broadcasting, Dignity, game analytics, Metaphysics, New York Yankees, Red Sox/Yankees, Subjectivity























ddup says:
It's been said that contemplating "John Smoltz qua John Smoltz" would include contemplating the possibility of ironing your shirt while you're wearing it. (http://www.cbc.ca/sports/columns/top10/baseball_injuries.html#1)
But John Smoltz qua John Smoltz does not agree. To John Smoltz qua John Smoltz the claim that he burned himself by ironing a shirt while he was wearing it is "The most false thing I've ever heard". (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1208/is_n25_v220/ai_18395243/)
At the least I think we can agree that John Smoltz qua pitcher, even now, is a much higher quality part of himself than John Smoltz qua philosopher.