Monty Python and Philosophy

Home > Other > Monty Python and Philosophy > Page 29
Monty Python and Philosophy Page 29

by Gary L. Hardcastle


  Burn The Witch, Monty Python and the Holy Grail

  The folks who fail to see what’s so funny about this, by the way, are exactly the folks who at one time or another have taught Introduction to Logic; they don’t need psychologists or their empirical studies to tell them about the reasoning abilities of the average citizen. To the rest of the analytic world, however, it’s been something of a shock, although, as I said, there’s quite a bit of debate over the whole matter.

  I know what some of you are thinking. It’s something like, “Okay, I’m convinced. The best expositor of contemporary analytic philosophy is Monty Python. But let’s not get carried away. There’s a lot more to philosophy than analytic philosophy, and what do these Monty Python people have to say about all of that? Not much, I imagine!” Those of you saying this have in mind Continental philosophy, named I believe after the continental breakfast. I could go on at length in thorough refutation of this complaint, but as my area of specialty, not to mention my topic today, is analytic philosophy, I’ll refute it with a single counterexample. Here it is.

  “The Cheese Shop,” Episode 33, Monty Python’s Flying Circus, “Salad Days”

  Now I hope you see that Mr. Mousebender’s attempt to get a little cheese resembles various other life experiences, most obviously, perhaps, a typical attempt to register for classes at a university. But I’d like to suggest something more grand. I’d like to suggest that the cheese shop is life itself, as described to us by existentialism. Mr. Mousebender is our existentialist hero, creating himself through choices of cheese in an uncooperative, nay, unfeeling world. Mr. Wensleydale, the keeper of the cheese shop, is the burden of life incarnate, who, in the fashion of Sisyphus’s rock, unfailingly returns a negative answer only to be queried again by our hero. Did Nietzsche, Sartre, or Camus, those all-stars of Continental philosophy, ever put it any better, in any of their often abstruse and sometimes impenetrable scribblings? Say no more, say no more.

  I know there are some folks out there who are still unconvinced of the philosophical stature of Monty Python. This is not because they worry that Monty Python has ignored continental philosophy, but because they think Monty Python is insensitive to THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY, where every letter in that expression is capitalized. Philosophy is a conversation going back to Thales, they will say, and if you don’t know what’s been said then you’re simply not doing philosophy, let alone good philosophy. This is a criticism leveled not infrequently at contemporary analytic philosophy, and though I agree with the sentiment, I do not agree that it works against Monty Python. As before, I rest my response on a single counter-example, prefaced with a comment or two. Good history of philosophy doesn’t just tell you what past philosophers said. It reveals connections between what they said, and connections between the philosophers themselves. And even better history discovers connections which are novel, surprising, and provocative. And the absolute best history of philosophy ties all this together and presents it in a manner so striking and harmonious that it just must be true. And since song is that thing which is striking and harmonious, the absolute most spectacularly best history of philosophy must be done in song. With this in mind, I present Monty Python’s “Bruces’ Philosophers Song.” It speaks for itself, and so, out of respect for Monty Python, whose brilliant explications of the central themes of contemporary analytic philosophy have gone unnoticed until today, and out of respect for the glorious history of philosophy, let us rise and sing the “Bruces’ Philosophers Song” with the members of Monty Python.

  Immanuel Kant was a real piss-ant who was very rarely stable.

  Heidegger, Heidegger was a boozy beggar who could think you under the table.

  David Hume could out-consume Schopenhauer and Hegel.

  And Wittgenstein was a beery swine who was just as sloshed as Schlegel.

  There’s nothing Nietzsche couldn’t teach ya ’bout the raising of the wrist.

  Socrates himself was permanently pissed.

  John Stuart Mill, of his own free will, on half a pint of shandy was particularly ill.

  Plato, they say, could stick it away, half a crate of whisky every day!

  Aristotle, Aristotle was a bugger for the bottle, And Hobbes was fond of his Dram.

  And René Descartes was a drunken fart: “I drink, therefore I am.”

  Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;

  A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he’s pissed.

  Thank you very much.120

  Everyone Remembers Their First Time: About the authors, nearly all of whom have an ‘s’ in their name.

  STEPHEN ASMA holds a Ph.D. in Philosophy from Southern Illinois University, Carbondale and he is currently a professor at Columbia College, Chicago. He is the author of several books, including The Gods Drink Whiskey: Stumbling Toward Enlightenment in the Land of the Tattered Buddha and Stuffed Animals and Pickled Heads: The Culture and Evolution of Natural History Museums. He was corrupted by Monty Python’s Flying Circus reruns at a young age, and credits this as the origin of his lifelong pursuit of profound absurdity. His website is www.stephenasma.com.

  RANDALL E. AUXIER first learned of Monty Python at the tender age of sixteen in 1977, attending the FM-100 Midnight Flicks at the Plaza Theatre in Memphis, Tennessee, where Monty Python and the Holy Grail was showing. Whether it was on account of the drugs or the movie (he cannot be certain), this was the one and only time he ever physically rolled into the aisle laughing at a movie (during King Arthur’s battle with the Black Knight), which was especially noteworthy since he did not have an aisle seat. He teaches philosophy at Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, and knows the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow.

  BRUCE BALDWIN hails presently from the University of Free Slough, where he teaches courses on Ludwig Wittgenstein, political science, and the theory of opaque names. He is the author of several articles as well as Getting Perfectly Clear: An Introduction to Political Theory (Camford University Press). He met the members of Monty Python in England in the early 1970s, a meeting that, as his contribution to this volume recounts, set off a chain of events that affected him professionally and personally.

  HARRY BRIGHOUSE is Professor of Philosophy and Affiliate Professor of Educational Policy Studies at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, and author of numerous papers on political philosophy, philosophy of education, and educational policy. He has unnerving expertise on the history of British comedy, especially the prehistory of Monty Python, having spent his formative years doing very little other than listening to Round The Horne, Hancock’s Half Hour, Men from the Ministry and I’m Sorry I’ll Read That Again. Although a broadly liberal egalitarian he strongly believes that there should be a law forbidding anyone from watching Monty Python’s Life of Brian without first having seen Spartacus.

  An assistant professor of philosophy at Lehman College of the City University of New York, ROSALIND CAREY received the M.A. in Religious Studies and the Ph.D. in Philosophy from Boston University. Co-editor of the Bertrand Russell Society Quarterly, her publications include several articles and two books (both forthcoming) on Bertrand Russell’s exchanges with Ludwig Wittgenstein on the nature of philosophy, logic and belief. Rosalind Carey was inducted into a Monty Python fan club as an adolescent, where she has remained ever since.

  NOËL CARROLL, in this life, is Andrew Mellon Professor of the Humanities at Temple University, and the author, most recently, of Beyond Aesthetics (2001) and Engaging the Moving Image (2003). In ultimate reality, on the other hand, he is a perpetual stand-up comic, eternally auditioning for Monty Python (with no success). Such is the meaning of life.

  PATRICK CROSKERY was a double major in Philosophy and English at the University of Virginia, and received his Ph.D. in Philosophy from the University of Chicago. He first started thinking seriously about the philosophical dimensions of Monty Python while teaching with Gary Hardcastle at Virginia Tech; Gary’s annual Monty Python talk was a highlight of the Philosophy Club speaker seri
es Patrick organized. He is now associate professor of philosophy and director of the Honors Program at Ohio Northern University. His research interests include the philosophical foundations of professional ethics and the implications of intellectual property for political philosophy.

  STEPHEN A. ERICKSON is Professor of Philosophy and the E. Wilson Lyon Professor of Humanities at Pomona College. He received his PhD at Yale (1964) and is author of Language and Being, Human Presence: At the Boundaries of Meaning, and The (Coming) Age of Thresholding, as well as numerous articles in journals such as The Review of Metaphysics, Man and World, Philosophy Today, The Harvard Review of Philosophy, and International Philosophical Quarterly. He lectures worldwide and, having been contacted by John Cleese in the nineties, has done public performances regarding “the meaning of life” with Cleese at several California colleges.

  STEVE FAISON was introduced to Monty Python indirectly when he happened upon Fawlty Towers reruns on American Public Television and went in search of more John Cleese. Steve earned his B.A. in philosophy at the University of Colorado at Denver. He is on schedule to receive his Ph.D. in philosophy from Vanderbilt University later this year. Steve recently had his essay on Santayana published in the Santayana Society Bulletin. In the near future you can catch Steve teaching at a college or university near you.

  GARY HARDCASTLE first encountered Monty Python by way of the American Corporation for Public Broadcasting and philosophy by way of the University of Pittsburgh, where he received his B.S. in psychology and the history and philosophy of science. He subsequently received his Ph.D. in Philosophy from the University of California—San Diego and has taught philosophy at Virginia Tech, the University of Wisconsin—Stevens Point, Bucknell University, and (currently) Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania. He is the editor, with Alan Richardson, of Logical Empiricism in North America (2003) and the author of several articles in the philosophy of science and over a thousand emails.

  REBECCA HOUSEL teaches writing and literature in upstate New York where Ecuadorian llamas first introduced her to Monty Python and Spam. She has contributed to Superheroes and Philosophy (2005) and Poker and Philosophy (2006). Rebecca has also published a series of five children’s novels and writes book reviews and articles for publications like Redbook and the Journal of Popular Culture. After receiving her B.A. and M.A. in English from the University of Rochester, she traveled to Sydney to complete her doctoral studies at the University of New South Wales, as well as continue her search for the elusive, yet deadly, killer rabbit.

  JOHN HUSS converted to Pythonism on his twelfth birthday at a screening of Monty Python and the Holy Grail at the Colonial Twin in Pompton Lakes, New Jersey. He received his B.S. in geology from Beloit College, an M.S. in geophysical sciences and a Ph.D. in the history and philosophy of science from the University of Chicago, while rocking out with The John Huss Moderate Combo. He is currently Director of the Quantitative Skills Center at Reed College and Adjunct Assistant Professor of Philosophy at Portland State University.

  GEORGE REISCH first glimpsed the life of the mind when, in 1977, he encountered Monty Python’s Flying Circus playing on a suburban television set that was not far from Pompton Lakes, New Jersey. His career path thus determined, he studied physics and history and philosophy of science at Bowdoin College and the University of Chicago, and then wrote How the Cold War Transformed Philosophy of Science (2005) in a single afternoon. He likes strong coffee, occasionally teaches philosophy at Northwestern University, and edits books at Open Court Publishing Company.

  ALAN RICHARDSON is Professor of Philosophy and Distinguished University Scholar at the University of British Columbia. (No, really.) He is author or editor of many, many things that have ‘logical empiricism’ in the title. When he first started watching Monty Python’s Flying Circus, the PBS station in Philadelphia showed it just before Jacob Bronowski’s The Ascent of Man. Ever since then he has felt that a properly cultured life requires a combination of comedy and history and philosophy of science. Currently, he is working with the internationally known cultural critic Lars Adrian Cohn on elimiDATE and Philosophy, which will include a special section offering advice for those on the philosophy job market.

  KEVIN SCHILBRACK earned his Ph.D. at the University of Chicago Divinity School. A philosopher of religions, he is the editor of Thinking through Myths: Philosophical Perspectives (2002) and Thinking through Rituals: Philosophical Perspectives (2004). He teaches at Wesleyan College in Macon, Georgia, the first college in the world chartered to grant degrees to women and where the students are quite unlike “wicked, bad, naughty Zoot.” His quest is to rehabilitate metaphysics as a form of rational inquiry, and his favorite color is blue. No—black!

  EDWARD SLOWIK became an avid Monty Python fan in his early teens, viewing the original series on public television in Chicago during the mid-1970s. The cumulative effect of watching the show at such a tender age (he did not heed the warnings about “young or more sensitive viewers”) left him incapacitated, such that only an academic career remained open to him. He received his Ph.D. in Philosophy from Ohio State University, specializing in the history and philosophy of science, especially space and time, and Early Modern philosophy. He has many publications in these areas, including Cartesian Spacetime (2002). He is Associate Professor in Philosophy at Winona State University in Winona, Minnesota.

  KURT SMITH is an Assistant Professor of philosophy at Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania. He earned his Ph.D. in philosophy at Claremont Graduate University. His area of specialization is early modern philosophy, which focuses on theories of perception and representation. He caught a moment of Monty Python’s Flying Circus once when he was a kid flipping through channels (very likely racing to ABC in order to get his weekly fix of The Six Million Dollar Man). He thinks he saw part of an episode once while stoned as an undergraduate as UC Irvine, but this may have been an episode of Fawlty Towers. His contribution here is pretty much the result of an online postmodern random essay generator. His “turn-ons” are world peace and long walks on the beach. He hopes that this book will sell so that he can score a quick couple of hundred bucks.

  MICHELLE SPINELLI has been an avid fan of British television and movies for the last fifteen years. With a B.A. in English from Oberlin College and an M.A. in Women’s History from Sarah Lawrence College, Michelle has published in the area of women writers and reformers in the United States. She has a strong interest in the history of “madness” and is currently studying how the treatment of individuals with mental illness has changed over time in New York City, where she lives.

  JAMES STACEY TAYLOR first encountered philosophy when growing up in England through watching Monty Python. As a result he came to believe that were he to move to Scotland he would secure instant fame as a great tennis player, and so decided to study for his first degree (an MA.) at St. Andrews University. He went on to complete an M.Litt. at St. Andrews, and then an M.A. and a Ph.D. at Bowling Green State University, Ohio. His most recent books are Personal Autonomy: New Essays (2005) and Stakes and Kidneys: Why Markets in Human Body Parts are Morally Imperative (2005). He likes bad puns.

  What Was All That,Then?

  Abraham (Biblical)

  absurd, life as

  absurd hero, examples of

  Adam (Biblical)

  Adams, John

  Agganna sutta

  Agnew, Spiro

  analytic philosophy

  revolts in

  anatta

  Anselm, Saint

  anthropomorphism

  Archimedes

  argument

  philosophical

  value of

  Argument from Design

  Argument from Miracles

  Aristotle

  Nicomachean Ethics

  Arjuna

  Arrested Development (TV show)

  Arthur, King

  in Monty Python and The Holy Grai

  Arthurian legend and patriarchy

  atomism, philosophi
cal

  Augustine, Saint

  Austin, J.L.

  Ayer, A.J.

  Language, Truth, and Logic

  Baden-Powell, Sir Robert Knight’s Code

  bad faith

  Beethoven, Ludwig van

  Bentham, Jeremy

  Bergman, Ingmar

  The Seventh Seal

  Bergson, Henri

  Bhagavad Gita

  black comedy

  Black Knight

  blasphemy

  versus heresy

  Bloke, Mrs. (in Monty Python’s The Meaning of Life)

  Bosch, Hieronymus

  Brahman

  Brian (Cohen Maximus) (in Monty Python’s Life of Brian)

  character of

  as existentialist humanist

  followers of

  growth of

  on individuals

  miracles of

  preaching of

  prophesying of

  British confidence

  British humor

  as self-mocking

  Broad, C.D.

  Bronowski, Jacob

  Brown, John

  the Bruces, in Monty Python

 

‹ Prev