TOW #1- There Is No Theory Of Everything

Simon Critchley is a professor of philosophy at The New School. He received his Bachelor’s from the University of Essex, his Masters in Philosophy in the University of Nice, and his Ph.D from the University of Essex. His work typically focuses on the relationship between the ethical and political within philosophy (The European Graduate School, 1). In Critchley’s article, There Is No Theory of Everything, he is describing his personal experiences with philosophy in school and how it developed his theories today. He explains that he believes though philosophy is an important branch of science to study, there are certain limits to where we actually need to explain things. Some things can be solved scientifically, but other things simply fall into natural instinct. There is no way to truly explain the natural occurrences and reactions. 

Throughout reading his article, I came to recognize that it was intended for other philosophers or those who are interested in philosophy. Much of the information and terms that he provides are rather uncommon to an everyday reader, yet would catch the attention of another philosopher. At the beginning of the article, Critchley provides several anecdotes in order to apply ethos to his argument. Using famous philosophers that other philosophers would likely be familiar with, such as Morgenbesser, Plato, and Xenophon, he is proving to us in the very beginning that he is educated in what he does. He says anecdotes, such as talking about Morgenbesser’s last words on his deathbed, “become a way of both revering the teacher and humanizing them… keeping them within human reach,” (Chritchley, para 4). 

Critchley emphasizes this point made by his anecdotes by providing his memories of his philosopher professor, Frank Cioffi. Cioffi was a very eccentric man whose passion about what he taught made him more likeable to both his students and the reader. After introducing us to Cioffi, he uses him to support his idea that there is not a theory for everything. As Cioffi has a rule of “no B.S.”, he had the perspective that not everything had to be calculated and hypothesized. Using this eccentric character to help make his point, Critchley helps emphasize his idea in words that are not his own. 

Critchley’s purpose is simply to educate and convince others of his theory. He believes that many philosophers put most of their time trying to complicate things that are best left simple. In order to make well-rounded and focused theories, we must allow nature to be natural, and science to be scientific. Though I feel that it could be executed a bit better, I believe that Critchley accomplished his purpose. He introduces us to this ‘character’ who encouraged him to start believing in this theory, as well as providing us with several anecdotes in order to establish ethos with his reader. He also uses many hyperboles to better represent his argument. Overall, Critchley’s work is well rounded and adds up to an interesting thesis. He was not afraid to put his voice out there, and was even willing to use rhetorical strategies in order to argue a scientific topic.