Beyond 鈥榩ositive thinking鈥�: How a philosophy professor sustains hope
Defining what entails a meaningful life has preoccupied philosophers from Plato and Aristotle to Simone de Beauvoir and Iris Murdoch. Surveying centuries of thoughtful chin-tugging about the human condition, Kieran Setiya identifies a broad trend: 鈥渁n affinity with 鈥榯he power of positive thinking鈥� that implores us not to dwell on trials and tribulations but to dream of the life we want.鈥�
He offers that critical appraisal early in 鈥淟ife Is Hard: How Philosophy Can Help Us Find Our Way,鈥� his latest book and a meditative antidote to the 鈥渂est life鈥� orthodoxy that fuels the sprawling, insatiable self-help industry.
Tacking away from both magical thinking and soothing rationalizations, Professor Setiya, who teaches philosophy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, urges us to look straight at hardship and uncertainty as part of 鈥渓iving well.鈥� He argues that only through a candid reckoning with the darker side of human experience 鈥� grief, failure, loneliness, injustice 鈥� can we arrive at a hard-earned hope that counters denialism and defeatism alike.
Why We Wrote This
A story focused onWhat gives life meaning? A professor of philosophy says that grappling with adversity helps us feel empathy for others, which shifts our focus and makes genuine hope possible.
He takes readers on an engaging journey through ancient and contemporary philosophy,聽 literature and film, and personal experience and reflection. We hear from Ren茅 Descartes, Immanuel Kant, and Simone Weil; from William Shakespeare, Virginia Woolf, and Joan Didion; and from the author himself about his struggles, doubts, and qualified optimism.
Professor Setiya spoke to the Monitor about the power of compassion, the pitfalls of life narratives, and the ability to sustain hope in the moment and for the future. This interview has been edited and condensed.
How are unhappiness, anger, grief, and other painful emotions part of 鈥渓iving well,鈥� as you define it?
There鈥檚 a big-picture thought that came into focus [while I was] writing the book. It's about an abstract distinction between happiness as a state of mind and living well as meaningful engagement with what鈥檚 actually around us. The task is finding a path between unrealistic visions of an ideal life and a kind of detachment or acceptance.
It鈥檚 very clear to us that there are many forms of unhappiness. Grieving about individual loss is one; grief or anger about injustice in the world is another. Certain kinds of negative emotions are part of living well 鈥� the task is to say, 鈥淲e can鈥檛 just accept things as they are. We have to make the best of a bad lot.鈥� In trying to make the best of it, there鈥檚 a tolerance for our own and other people鈥檚 frailties that is part of philosophical wisdom.
In what ways can compassion for others help us cope with our own burdens?
My sense is that often the experience of suffering involves an oscillation between being very self-focused and, other times, having the revelation that everyone is going through their own difficulties. There鈥檚 the possibility of leveraging our own difficulties into the realization that other people have difficulties and having empathy for them. There鈥檚 a confluence between thinking about others and living well in a way that answers our own needs. Those two things are not incompatible.
When we look at issues like climate change, economic inequality, and social injustice, how can empathy motivate us to act?
There鈥檚 the moment of hopelessness, the moment of thinking, 鈥淭here鈥檚 nothing I can do.鈥� The response to that is simple but it鈥檚 hard to hang on to, which is that the difference between doing nothing and doing something is the key. The fact that we鈥檙e relatively limited 鈥� we can鈥檛 change everything 鈥� doesn鈥檛 mean that the little differences we can make count for nothing and we should just forget it. We have to try to live up to the obligation to do something about the injustice we鈥檙e entangled with.
But how do we overcome a sense of resignation when those problems can feel insurmountable?
The danger is a certain kind of black-and-white thinking. If you look at what鈥檚 happening with climate change or the faltering of democracy or women鈥檚 rights, there鈥檚 an inclination to say, 鈥淪hould I be hopeful or should I despair?鈥� 鈥� as if those are the only two options.
The option we should be taking is almost always, 鈥淲hat should I realistically hope for, and what can I realistically do about it?鈥� We鈥檙e not living in the black-and-white world. We鈥檙e living in shades of gray, and that is uncomfortable. You鈥檙e forced to face the questions, 鈥淐ould I be doing something more? How much does the world demand of me?鈥� I don鈥檛 think there鈥檚 a simple rule for adjudicating those questions. All you can say is, if you鈥檙e asking those questions, you鈥檙e in the right place 鈥� it鈥檚 a sign of what living well has to look like in conditions where there is grave injustice.
In warning against viewing our lives as narratives and dwelling on success vs. failure, you suggest that we emphasize 鈥減rocess鈥� over 鈥減rojects.鈥� What鈥檚 the purpose of that shift in thought?
There is a temptation to picture oneself as the hero of a Hollywood movie: 鈥淪o what鈥檚 the plot? What鈥檚 the great challenge facing this hero?鈥� The more you think of your life in those terms 鈥� as defined by a central project 鈥� the more you risk mortgaging your life to that project. You may succeed. But if you fail, it won鈥檛 be just that something went wrong. You鈥檒l be inclined to see yourself as a failure.
Everyone鈥檚 life is a mess of little successes and failures and attachments. Focusing on one big project 鈥� one kind of defining narrative 鈥� is a blinkered way of approaching life. That鈥檚 something we should resist 鈥� to not see ourselves through the lens of failure and success, and thinking instead of the ongoing process that accompanies those particular achievements or failures.
How can that framework help us confront injustice and inequality writ large?
When we engage in protests, for instance, we鈥檙e not sure it鈥檚 going to make a difference. [But] there鈥檚 value in the process. There鈥檚 value in standing up against injustice and trying to make a difference, even if we fail. That can play a role in giving us a healthier perspective on what to expect and demand of ourselves as people who are responsible to some degree for making the world a better and more just place.
Near the end of the book you write, 鈥淭o hope well is to be realistic about probabilities, not to succumb to wishful thinking or be cowed by fear.鈥� Is there a way to envision the future that helps us navigate the present?
When you鈥檙e looking at the next 50 years, it鈥檚 going to be very tough, even in the best-case scenario. When I take a longer view, it鈥檚 not unreasonable to hope that we鈥檒l have a green economy, we鈥檒l have more sustainable economic practices, people will be living on better terms.
It may not happen, but we don鈥檛 know. And hope thrives on not knowing. To fully feel the force of that, you have to think, 鈥淚 care about humanity in 2100 or 2150.鈥� Caring about the future is a source of consolation for dealing with the sense of despair and anxiety in one鈥檚 own life now. That鈥檚 one of the ways in which compassion for others can be a source of solace for us, too.
