[This blog post describes the research I presented at the 2022 APA Pacific meeting in Vancouver, in a presentation called “How to Have an Insight.” This research explores how Simon Weil’s concept of attention can help us better understand Iris Murdoch’s views on the topic, and how to think about people in a way that is truthful, loving, and just. I also have an in-progress manuscript on these same issues.]
Typically once we’re attempting to reply a query, it’s clear how we should always go about addressing the query. Proper on the outset, we are able to consider a sequence of steps that can get us the reply we’d like, and at every step, we’ll know we’re steadily making progress in direction of getting the ultimate reply. An instance of this form of query is “What number of instances does the letter ‘e’ present up on this weblog submit?”. For me, the primary technique that involves thoughts is studying all of the phrases left to proper, maintaining a working tally on a bit of paper as I’m going. Every step of the best way, I’d know the way shut I used to be attending to the top of the weblog submit and having the ultimate tally at hand.
However different questions—all of that are way more attention-grabbing than that first query—are much less easy to handle. Typically once we try to reply a query and have entry to all the knowledge that we should always want and on a regular basis to assume that we should always want, we nonetheless find yourself feeling like our pondering simply runs up towards a wall. Typically a solution finally involves us, but it surely doesn’t really feel in any respect prefer it involves us in a neat, step-by-step method.
What psychologists name “perception issues” are one instance of the extra attention-grabbing sort of query. You may need heard of 1 perception downside particularly—the 9 Dot Drawback. On this downside, you’ve got 9 dots on a bit of paper, organized in a three-by-three sq. configuration. What it’s essential do is join all of the dots with 4 straight traces with out taking your pencil off the paper. When confronted by this query, folks usually run up towards that wall of their pondering earlier than finally arising with the precise reply.
The questions that result in these blocks in our pondering embody greater than “perception issues.” As an example, the sensation of working up towards a wall in aware thought comes up on a regular basis in my very own experiences of doing philosophy. Typically I perceive all the pieces I believe I ought to must a couple of philosophical query and have on a regular basis to deliberate I ought to must, however neither a solution nor a way involves me. After which, finally, one thing modifications (no less than typically) and I arrive at a solution.
A few of my present analysis considerations how Simone Weil’s (1909–1943) recommendation about sort out these particularly difficult questions can advance our understanding of Murdoch’s contributions to the research of consideration. Weil thinks that the important thing to answering issues like perception issues is using a specific number of consideration, and I believe the psychological research of downside fixing offers assist for that view.
Pondering by means of Weil’s recommendation regarding these questions additionally helps us perceive the work of Iris Murdoch (1919–1999) a bit higher, as a result of in The Sovereignty of Good Murdoch tells us that (no less than in a part of her e-book) she “borrows” Weil’s idea of consideration. Understanding Murdoch’s work is especially worthwhile, as a result of the a part of her work that I give attention to is about how we are able to handle to attentively take into consideration the folks round us in a method that’s extra truthful, loving, and simply. Because it seems, the number of consideration that Weil advises us to make use of to sort out issues like perception issues is in lots of respects the identical number of consideration that Murdoch thinks we should always use to attentively take into consideration the folks round us in a method that’s extra truthful, loving, and simply. (I say “in lots of respects” as a result of there are some small variations between their accounts—I get into this concern extra in one among my in-progress manuscripts.)
Weil on Consideration
Psychologists distinguish between “focal” and “diffuse” consideration, and it is a distinction that may assist us perceive how Weil thinks we should always reply particularly difficult questions. Focal consideration is sort of a vibrant highlight which we are able to direct at one or a couple of objects. Diffuse consideration is sort of a dimmer lamp which we are able to direct at a bigger vary of objects. Psychologists research each these varieties on the stage of attentive perceiving in addition to the extent of attentive pondering. As an example, in aware notion we are able to change from diffusely attending to a complete panorama to focally attending to only one tree within the panorama. Equally, in aware thought we are able to change from diffusely attending to a broad subject, like “what Murdoch talks about in The Sovereignty of Good,” to focally attending to a slim subject, like “Murdoch’s instance of what it feels wish to quell anxious pondering by means of all of the sudden attending to a kestrel.”
Weil’s view is that when attempting to reply particularly difficult questions we should always attempt to focally attend to nothing in any respect, and to concurrently diffusely attend to a query and knowledge that’s related to answering that query. As we do that, solutions will happen to us sporadically, and after they do, we are able to verify in the event that they work. In the event that they don’t, she thinks we should always return to the rigorously structured posture in thought that she describes. (Actually, Weil thinks that it’s helpful to make use of this technique even when we’re confronted with a comparatively straightforward query, simply in order that we’ll get observe for pondering this fashion when it really issues.)
Within the essay “Reflections on the Proper Use of Faculty Research With a View to the Love of God,” Weil makes use of a comparability to a person on a mountain, gazing straight ahead, to assist us get a grip on what it might be like to handle a query in the best way she describes (You could find this comparability on web page 35 of Waiting for God, which comprises the essay). Weil says that the person’s consciousness is structured into two components: he gazes ahead at nothing particularly, and he’s additionally conscious, however in a extra peripheral method, of the forests and plains beneath his gaze. Weil’s thought is that once we comply with her recommendation about reply an particularly difficult query, our consciousness ought to equally be structured into two very totally different components. Our effort to maintain focal consideration empty corresponds to the person on the mountain’s ahead gaze. Each are empty. Our effort to bear in mind a query and knowledge related to answering the query corresponds to what the person on the mountain is conscious of extra peripherally.
I’ll word that this may be a controversial studying of Weil. I mentioned extra of the textual proof in favor of it within the APA presentation that impressed this weblog submit. In that very same presentation, I argued that wanting on the psychological literature on perception issues offers assist for Weil’s views. It usually looks like stepping again and adopting a frame of mind that’s partly composed of diffuse consideration is what permits individuals to see their issues in a brand new mild and to provide you with a way of answering the query that can work. (See this paper for an summary of perception issues.) As an example—and sorry for the spoiler—fixing the 9 Dot Drawback requires giving up the belief you can’t draw a line that’s “exterior” of the three-by-three grid of dots. There may be really nothing within the framing of the query that tells individuals to work with that assumption. However it’s an assumption individuals are inclined to make, and one they should free themselves from by way of diffuse consideration, earlier than they will handle to reply the query.
I ought to word that what I describe above is only one a part of Weil’s system of views on consideration, and never the a part of her system that many readers of Weil give attention to. Readers of Weil usually give attention to her concept {that a} specific number of consideration would possibly cut back our consciousness of our selves, or by some means cut back our selves in a extra literal away. Additionally they usually give attention to Weil’s concept that the number of consideration I’ve described above is one that’s finest used throughout prayer, or one that’s notably helpful in ethical deliberation. All these points of Weil’s thought do match collectively, and all of them have to be talked about to explain her views in an exhaustive method. On this weblog submit, one purpose I’m emphasizing the extra purely epistemic side of her thought is that I believe that it might be useful for anybody who has struggled with that have of working up towards a wall whereas answering a troublesome query. And I’m additionally emphasizing this side of her thought as a result of it helps us higher perceive the work of Murdoch.
Murdoch on Consideration
So now we are able to flip to Murdoch. Murdoch, in The Sovereignty of Good, famously tells this story a couple of mom and a daughter-in-law, and describes how the mom makes use of her consideration to enhance her view of her daughter-in-law.
“A mom, whom I shall name M, feels hostility to her daughter-in-law, whom I shall name D. M finds D fairly a good-hearted woman, however whereas not precisely widespread but definitely unpolished and missing in dignity and refinement. D is inclined to be pert and acquainted, insufficiently ceremonious, brusque, typically positively impolite, all the time tiresomely juvenile. … Thus a lot for M’s first ideas about D. Time passes, and it could possibly be that M settles down with a hardened sense of grievance and a hard and fast image of D, imprisoned (if I’ll use a query begging phrase) by the cliché: my poor son has married a foolish vulgar woman. Nevertheless, the M of the instance is an clever and well-intentioned particular person, able to self-criticism, able to giving cautious and simply consideration to an object which confronts her. M tells herself: ‘I’m old school and traditional. I could also be prejudiced and narrow-minded. I could also be snobbish. I’m definitely jealous. Let me look once more.’ Right here I assume that M observes D or no less than displays intentionally about D, till progressively her imaginative and prescient of D alters.” (pp. 17–18)
So it is a story the place “cautious and simply” consideration on M’s half allows her to alter her view of D. However simply what sort of consideration is at work right here? We have to know some extra particulars earlier than we are able to attempt to comply with Murdoch’s recommendation ourselves.
You would possibly count on M to be utilizing purely focal consideration. That is the number of consideration that first involves thoughts for many individuals if you point out “consideration.” On this mind-set, M’s particularly cautious focal consideration to D, whether or not in notion or in thought or each, is what has allowed M to get an correct, and improved, view of what D is like as an individual. (I believe that it is a method some current readers of Murdoch perceive the number of consideration at work within the M & D case; I mentioned this extra in my APA presentation about this analysis, however gained’t get into these particulars right here.)
I’m fearful about this studying of Murdoch. Murdoch tells us that she “borrows” Weil’s account of consideration, and though Weil talked about a number of sorts of consideration in her work, I think Murdoch should have had in thoughts the number of consideration I mentioned above. It was, in any case, what Weil regarded as a very powerful sort of consideration we might study to deploy. But when the number of consideration that Weil thinks we should always use to reply difficult questions is the number of consideration at work within the story of M & D, M can’t be paying purely focal consideration to D. As an alternative, if M had been actually following Weil’s recommendation, M could be occupying a frame of mind structured into two components. M could be striving to focally attend to nothing, and to diffusely attend to the query of what sort of an individual D really is, and knowledge that’s related to answering that query.
Furthermore, it looks like this latter technique is one that’s simply extra prone to work. I think that for many of us, if we already assume poorly of somebody, merely focally attending to that particular person, in an particularly effortful and sustained method, would possibly simply deepen our annoyance with that particular person. However following Weil’s recommendation on this context entails doing extra than simply focally attending to the particular person you assume poorly of. It entails focally attending to nothing, and diffusely attending to a query about that particular person. It’s an open-ended mind-set that might will let you see that particular person in a completely new mild. (If, certainly, you actually ought to. However Murdoch has stipulated that within the case of M & D, M’s seeing D in a brand new mild is additionally M’s seeing D extra precisely.)
So, Murdoch says that she borrows Weil’s idea of consideration, and it independently looks like purely focal consideration wouldn’t assist M enhance her view of D’s character. Subsequently, it looks like the number of consideration at work within the case of M & D is quite a lot of consideration that’s partly (however not wholly) composed of diffuse consideration. This is a vital realization for these of us who need to comply with Murdoch’s recommendation about do higher justice, in our attentive thought, to the folks round us. (My conclusion raises some additional questions on Murdoch’s work, like whether or not this number of consideration is the one which she is all the time speaking about when she talks about consideration. I believe the reply to that query is “no.”)
To sum up, getting clear on Weil’s account of the epistemic function of a specific number of consideration is one thing that may advance our understanding of Murdoch’s contributions to the research of consideration. And getting clear on what each of them must say concerning the research of consideration is attention-grabbing in its personal proper, as a result of their work provides up sensible ideas about handle any of the onerous questions we would encounter in day-to-day life or philosophical theorizing, in addition to do higher justice, in our attentive pondering, to the folks round us.
Mark Fortney
