Bernard Williams, Genealogy & Truthfulness

Genealogy or Apostolic succession or 'silsila' or 'parampara' can matter if legitimate authority is something inherited. Artistic or Intellectual genealogy can matter if value creation is neither wholly conceptual nor aesthetic but contingent on historical circumstances. Thus, in the old days, a musician descended from Bach or Tansen might be valued more highly than an artiste of greater virtuosity but plebeian origin.

However, this is largely a subjective matter based on expectations. Modern technology has made access to music easy and ubiquitous. If we find we listen more frequently to the Gundescha brothers than the blue blooded Dagars, then we give up our genealogical prejudices.

In 'Truth and Truthfulness' Bernard Lewis considers the relationship between genealogy and alethia so as to challenge 'post-modern' relativism and see whether Liberalism might have a legitimating genealogy such that it might propagate in conformity to its own principles. 

Williams is being silly. What takes myths to pieces is people not paying attention to them coz they are boring and silly and, anyway, better myths have appeared. Thus the Bible lost salience coz Superman could reverse the arrow of time to save Lois Lane while Christ couldn't even use X-ray vision to make fun of Caiaphas's puny genitals, let alone kick his Sadducee ass.

Truthful inquiry is only as good as the guy doing it. Smart people aren't going to waste their time on History or Political Philosophy when they could be curing Cancer or making billions in I.T.

No economic or political arrangement needs stupid tossers talking shite to each other in a wholly worthless University Dept. whose chief function is to enable jocks and Trustafarians to acquire a prestigious Credential despite being drooling imbeciles.

This is not to say there can't be a truthful inquiry into Political Liberalism. But it would either proceed in a deflationary manner, like a truthful account of the influence of my neighbor's cat upon British Macroeconomic policy, or else be part of a Social Science 'theory of Everything'.

Obviously, since both Political Liberalism and my neighbor's cat, have little influence on anything, being primarily concerned with licking their own arseholes, we would need a very sophisticated theory of all the determinants of both Macroeconomic policy and the ways in which wholly narcissistic and self-involved agents, like Political Philosophers and my neighbor's cat, influence those determinants.

Cats make purring noises and people feel more relaxed when they look at them or when they stroke or feed them. This could influence 'animal spirits' in the Macro-economy. By contrast, Political Philosophers talking stupid shite may have a negative effect. Williams turns from 'truthful inquiry' to consider 'interpretations'- i.e. just-so stories which are either hopeful or despairing.

Once again, this is silly. A story is 'hopeful' if it shows a person or animal or a group of animals- like the polo ponies in Kipling's 'the Maltese Cat'- overcoming adverse circumstances using 'know-how' in a plausible and inspiring manner. Here, the 'how' of things is crucial to the plot.

A despairing story shows the futility of even consummate intelligence, character and beneficial cooperation. The odd thing is, no such story actually exists because as Nabakov pointed out w.r.t Kafka's 'Metamorphosis' the big insect in question has the power of flight. It can fly out of the window and go have wonderful adventures. What is interesting about insects is how they do cool stuff- which is why Spiderman and Antman are popular franchises. If the 'how' aspect is 'vanishingly reticent', the thing will fail to grip and turn into a M. Night Syamalamadingdong shit-show.

Williams ends his book on a distinctly lame note-

Truth is stuff STEM subjects discover. That sort of truth sets us free from drudgery. It may also set us free from this planet to roam the Universe. Who knows? It may free us from Death itself- as it has already greatly prolonged our average life expectancy.

The 'virtues of truth' are those of utility on the one hand and scientific method on the other. Shite like this does not qualify on either count. It may have a genealogy- in the sense that being buttfucked by a priest who was buttfucked as a choirboy by another priest who in turn was buttfucked by a priest can create a chain leading back to one of the more colorful Popes- but this genealogy does not feature any bouncing babies and can only be useful to Epidemiologists.

The European Enlightenment showed no 'great courage, intransigence, or social effectiveness'. Why? It was chiefly concerned with making out that it was smart. This was not an entirely harmless type of dandyism as the Marquis of Condorcet found out. When Enlightened people get hold of power they start chopping off each other's heads.

It may be, in the future, that there will be a class of political philosophers who 'can see the truth and not be broken by it'.  But this will only be coz they are genuinely happier giving blowjobs at truck stops. Indeed, wiping the jizz off their unkempt beards, they will chortle with glee contemplating the pitiful fate of their classmates who studied STEM subjects and thus condemned themselves to a life of affluence and social prestige.