Letters - February 23, 2000


Peter Singer

I am in agreement with those who would like to hear no more about Peter Singer, yet I felt moved to respond to the interview appearing in the January 26 issue (cover story). Is it possible that any educated person can take Singer's arguments seriously? His ideas are unoriginal and his reasoning unpersuasive. Are there no philosophers left at Princeton to refute his anemic attempts at argumentation? Come now, are we to take his definition of life as one with any intellectual weight? (One is "alive" if one has awareness of oneself "existing" over time-are we perhaps confusing thinking and living?) Is it new that traditional Jewish thought included that infants who died in the first month of life were not truly alive? The Chinese have traditionally believed that infanticide was permissible for the first year of life. Is this new? In fact, Singer's "modest proposals" have been often proposed with a great deal more wit and vigor. Hitler was apparently extremely persuasive in his attempts to convince his people that the lives of disabled persons were worthless and that spending money on them was a waste of precious resources that could be better utilized. The fact that Singer seems to be rather more bland than Hitler does not make his ideas any less unpalatable.

Though an alumna in the same issue writes in a letter that Singer should remain a valued member of the faculty unless he personally threatens to euthanize an infant, I can assure her that there is in Singer's intellectual framework no difference between the thinking and the doing. As Singer said, there is no difference between not sending all your money to Oxfam and not helping to rescue a person who is drowning in front of you. Singer seems to enjoy guilt, though I suppose he's not sure why it exists.

I do not think Singer should be vilified. As I suggested, he seems more a nebbish than a villain. I am astonished that his positions are so uninteresting. In what way is he the "most important philosopher alive?" Define "philosophy" and define "important" please! If this is the best Princeton can come up with in terms of cutting edge intellectual achievement, then it is a second-rate institution. Unless you can find something less stultifyingly dull to say, please-no more coverage of Peter Singer!!!

Josephine Mineo Harrison '73
Wilmette, Ill.

 

Clearly Peter Singer has charged up the Princeton community. May I lob in three thoughts?

1. If personhood is the awareness of oneself as existing over time, I don't think the 28-day (plus or minus) boundary stands up to observation. A newborn's movements are completely free-form for only a day or two. You can see intention set in very quickly (patterns in the hand movements). And intention presupposes oneself existing in time.

2. One of the members of our family, Willy, knows that if he displays his ability to pass in and out of a door several times in succession over a short period of time, we will be reminded that we have forgotten to feed him. This shows clear intention. But Willy is not even remotely a candidate for personhood. Willy is a cat.

Perhaps Peter Singer would welcome Willy into quasi-personhood. He often fudges the distinction between animals and humans. (Singer, I mean. So does Willy, in a different sense.) And indeed, to answer the claim that he may have more compassion for animals than for humans, Singer states his unified position: "I am opposed to unnecessary suffering whether it's a human or an animal."

This crystal-clear statement may just be fatuous, trivial, and obvious, like unanimous congressional resolutions. But I'm sure Singer's many books don't all say, "Hurray for the good guys" in 63 languages. So I guess he is suggesting that he knows what suffering is, and what suffering is necessary and what is not.

If I have this right so far, then either Singer is being very arrogant-playing God-or, more likely, he is removing the metaphysics from suffering and just trying to deal with it in its many untidy manifestations in this life. Is suffering simply a physical, molecular phenomenon?

The idea that human life, with its striving, its poetry, its passion, and its physical finality can in principle be represented by a set of equations having to do with things like the chemistry of the brain and our ultimate transformation into humus strikes me as, well, boring. Even if it turns out to be true, it's much more fun in the meantime to play that it's not.

And if suffering goes deeper than the physical, maybe some of these people Singer would euthanize are suffering for some wider purpose. He would eliminate the pain and also eliminate the lesson. The same goes for substandard embryos, newborns, and adults. And the lesson in all these cases may extend to those of us lucky enough not to be doing the suffering, those of us merely witnessing it.

I'm not here to say that suffering teaches us religious lessons necessarily. I think so, but your life might be a rock opera or a sonnet instead of a pilgrimage to the promised land. You still should be reluctant to let some Princeton professor trim away the suffering component with his fancy algebra.

3. The only issue bigger than human suffering is, of course, Annual Giving. When I began reading about Singer, I reacted like many a red-blooded alum: I'm gonna get even through Annual Giving! Now it happens that I'm class agent for '71, something I enjoy, so I experience a textbook example of cognitive dissonance.

Here's what I decided: Princeton is bigger than Peter Singer and me. Get over it.

Rob Slocum '71 p'98
Stamford, Conn.


Princeton-Rutgers football

Andy Baxter's account of the 6-6 tie with Rutgers (circa 1975) jogged a bitter memory, although my recollection of the events is different (Letters, January 26). As I remember, the Rutgers fans tore down the goal post in the west end zone, before Princeton's drive. Subsequent to the touchdown (scored in the west end of the field), the referees conferred and decided not to allow Princeton to attempt the extra point at the east end of the field, where the goal post was still standing. The resultant two-point conversion attempt failed, and the game ended in a tie. I can remember as if it were yesterday the anger of the fans and the chants of "Forfeit, forfeit" from the Princeton faithful.

Time obviously has an impact on our memories, and I would be curious to know which account of the story is more accurate.

John Craft '76
Darien, Conn.


President's Page

 

The "President's Page" used to be found at the tail end of paw, and has recently moved to the very front. This change brings the feature directly to one's attention and leads me to comment about it. When asked who influenced your life the most, former students never say "the president." They name a professor. Students and alumni alike might have more interest in seeing a "Professor's Page" with occasional comments or essays from some of the professors of the various departments, rather than the regular comments of Harold Shapiro. This is in no way meant to demean President Shapiro, or his page. I appreciate Shapiro's excellence in providing effective and efficient leadership in the challenging administration of the university's day-to-day operations. And unfortunately, it is the kind of position that goes unnoticed when one is doing a good job. But the "President's Page" can, and should, be a bully pulpit to be used sparingly, when needed, for commanding emphasis upon matters of particular interest and importance to the university community. When this page is featured in each and every issue of paw, the device weakens and becomes more bull feathers than bully pulpit.

Rocky Semmes '79
Alexandria, Va.


The dark side of Silicon Valley

I greatly enjoyed Michael Lewis '82's account of investment banking during the 1980s' in his book Liar's Poker. It was deadly accurate and very amusing.

I'm wondering, though, about his latest book, The New, New Thing, written about by Wes Tooke '98 (In Review, December 15). In his paw interview, Lewis said he went to Silicon Valley looking for its dark side, but had trouble finding it.

How about this? Silicon Valley has the biggest concentration of EPA Superfund cleanup sites and toxic waste spills in the nation. The star-studded list of offenders, which includes Hewlett-Packard, Intel, Siemens, and Toshiba, have left behind a deadly soup of improperly handled toxins that have been slowly but surely making their way into the aquifers of the Santa Clara Valley.

Not unlike the mining companies that originally gave the Golden State its name, the companies that make up the success story of Silicon Valley succeeded spectacularly in what has become an all too common tradition in American business: extracting gargantuan profits for themselves while leaving all the liabilities for future generations. Many of the chemicals used by this so called clean industry are carcinogens. Others have a destructive effect on the central nervous system, the internal organs, and reproductive capability.

In his interview, Lewis astutely points out that the subjects of his book, Jim Clark and other Silicon Valley luminaries, have no interest in history. Now, hopefully, he understands at least one of the reasons why.

Ken McCarthy '81
Tivoli, N.Y.


Trustee Steve Forbes '70

I am writing in connection with the recent article concerning Steve Forbes '70 and the correspondence relating to his statements about Dr. Singer (Notebook, December 1; Letters, January 26).

Obviously, trustee or not, Forbes has the right to disagree with Singer or anyone else he chooses based upon a difference in fundamental ethical principles. However, once a faculty member has been hired, he or she should be free to express their opinions and beliefs without fear of retaliation by those who disagree. I submit that to threaten to withhold contributions until a faculty member with whom one disagrees is dismissed is unacceptable coercion and thus does threaten academic freedom.

It is striking that Forbes voted on Singer's appointment without, apparently, possessing any idea of who he was or what he stood for. That is a disturbing method of fulfilling one's responsibilities as a trustee.

Peter B. Dublin '63
Housatonic, Mass.


Diversity on campus

In connection to the letter of Frank Shaffer '48 (December 1), The Daily Princetonian had ceased publication with the war and was replaced by a weekly bulletin published by Nassau Hall that listed impending events for the week. With the end of the war and return of veterans, Nassau Hall made a great effort to reestablish campus activities. Besides organizing the cheerleaders for the first varsity game, I was asked to be business manager of the rejuvenated Daily Princetonian, with Mark Ethridge '46 of Louisville, and Peter Chew '46 of Virginia as coeditors.

We were summoned to President Dodds's office at two o'clock one afternoon, and there were Deans Godolphin and Finch, and the top administrative officers of the university. President Dodds explained that the university admissions office had received applications from two African Americans, and while the administration knew there would be a decrease in Annual Giving and untold anguish among some alumni, the administration wanted to know what the editorial policy of the independent campus paper would be. We were informed that the two men had attended Princeton through the V-12 program. I inquired what grades they achieved while here. When informed they had a three-point average, and knowing that none of us had higher grades, I said that as far as the Prince was concerned, they were already Princetonians, and we would support them if that was needed. The matter dropped there, the two men enrolled, and one named Wilson became a star on the 1948 varsity basketball team; I regret I don't remember the other gentleman's name. I think both men were placed in the Class of '48, although '47 would have readily accepted them.

Newton Duke Angier, '47
Flat Rock, N.C.


Larry DuPraz

I recently received a letter from William R. Elfers '71, president of the board of The Daily Princetonian, in which reference is made to Larry DuPraz's 80th birthday December 15.

I worked for the Prince in 1956-58, ending up as editorial chairman. I can testify that Larry was an unofficial teacher, doing some of the things that journalism professors do at other schools. He would explain the principles of layout and spacing, as well as commenting on placement of stories and content. He obviously loved the whole enterprise of putting out a daily paper, and communicated that enthusiasm to the uninitiated. Working on the Prince was all that much more exciting because of his interest and dedication. To hear that he worked at this task for more than 50 years makes me think Princeton owes him a special form of recognition.

I suggest that Princeton award Larry an honorary doctorate of journalism, or failing that an honorary LL.D.

Randal Marlin '59
Ottawa, Ont.


Anthony Trollope

Susan Lowell Humphreys's reminiscence of her graduate school experience (First Person, November 3) triggers my own, relating to our mutual friend, Anthony Trollope.

As a student, I enjoyed the rarest of pleasures, living in the wing of Janet and Hamilton Cottier's home at 4 Orchard Circle-behind Lowrie House and next door to the Goheens. Janet, whose charisma, charm and crustiness are still very much with me, had grown up in Princeton; and Ham, a gentleman farmer whose childhood was spent in the Plaza Hotel, had been a student and faculty member. Between the main house and my flat was a soaring library where Ham, in his dotage, pored over his myriad books, with Crispin, his standard poodle, sprawled on a needlepoint canine portrait crafted by Janet. Although Ham's academic interest had focused on Walter Scott, he was a true bibliophile, who could never get close enough to a book; and for a man who was neither demonstrative nor paternal, that he placed illustrated children's books at the very centre of his collection-now at home in Firestone-was puzzling.

When I decided to take up an assignment in Beijing during the early '80s, I suddenly recalled Ham's vow to reread all of Trollope each year, and it was a copy of The Warden, given me by Ham, that I read on the airplane, China bound.

Over the course of my tenure in the Chinese capital, Trollope kept me on the rails-along with Handel, my other friend. There I was, in the very belly of the Chinese cosmos-or so I thought-being rescued from it by the universal wisdom of that keenest of life's observers; and when I next moved on to an assignment in London, I took the greatest of pleasure in boring people rigid about the fiction of the man who invented the post box rather than banging on about China. Many a hostess was let down, I suspect; after all, it was my time in Beijing and not Trollope's view of woman as expressed in The Belton Estate that got me invited in the first place!

Peter Rupert Lighte *81
Hong Kong


Gifts to Princeton

Having received a copy of Gifts to Princeton recently I would like to suggest a change in its format: Donors should be listed by groups according to the size of their gifts with no precise amounts attached.

First, all gifts to Princeton should be recognized publicly, no matter how small. It is the thought that counts in matters of giving, and not to publicly acknowledge small donations sends a blatant message that they are not appreciated. This is an especially bad message in the case of a university, home to the notoriously underpaid pursuit of scholarship. A gift of $250 from an assistant professor probably represents a considerably greater sacrifice than $250,000 from a master of the universe.

Second, there is something a little creepy about listing a seven-figure donation down to the last dollar. You can just see the check from Goldman-Sachs before your very eyes. Round numbers really do look a little less calculated . . . literally and figuratively.

Margaret B. Ruttenberg '76
Newton , Mass.


Princeton in the Movies

I enjoyed reading Princeton in the Movies (cover story, November 3). However, although the author mentioned filming Scent of a Woman on campus, he did not include the fact that its screenplay was written by Bo Goldman '53, who earned an Oscar nomination for his efforts. In the story's sidebar , "Tigers in Hollywood," he mentions dozens of Princeton alumni, but fails to include Bo, even though he has won two Oscars (One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest and Melvin and Howard).

John G. Middleton '53
Locust, N.J.


Princeton Numerals

I recently received a letter addressed to: Herbert W. Hobler '44, p'68, g'99-my class, my son's class, and my grandson's class. I am submitting to the Alumni Council a more complete family description: Herbert W. Hobler '44, p'68, g'99, b'39, b'41, fl'71, xfl'81, u'81 (b is for brother, fl is for father-in-law, xfl for ex-father-in-law, and u is for uncle).

What I really want added, however, is "gg '22" for great-grandchild. That would make me 100-something to live for.

Herb Hobler '44
Princeton, N.J.


GO TO the Table of Contents of the current issue

GO TO PAW's home page

paw@princeton.edu