[Bups-dis] No Chowda for You, Cause Clams Have Feelings Too

[Duncan Crowe]

Hi Ed,

Just a short reply, I promise.

Those of you who have, like me, grown to appreciate Hugh Laurie's 
American accent may recognise the line "As the philosopher Mick Jagger 
once said 'you can't always get what you want.'"

I think there might actually be something in this? Am I the only person 
who sees the analogue with a bit of practical reasoning?

Consider: You can't always get what you want, but if you try sometimes 
you might find you get what you need.

Translation: Pursuing a course of action may not obtain the optimal 
known possible outcome because of confounding factors but persevering in 
the face of this may nevertheless result in the obtainment of hitherto 
unknown goal-satisfying alternatives.

Another random theme which occurs in two pop-songs I can think of is the 
extent to which the suffering of previous generations generates 
obligations for the current generation to act in a particular (one 
assumes, virtuous manner). Know what I'm talking about? "Handbags and 
Gladrags" is blatantly of this theme, but I think a reasonable 
interpretation of the video to REM's 'Shiny Happy People' sees it saying 
the same thing - the singing, dancing folk are reliant upon the exertion 
of the old man behind the scenes on the bike. I'd think it was some kind 
of quasi-Marxist thing about exploitation except for the fact his age 
reminds me of Bob Dylan's song too strongly.

Yours in nonsense,
Duncan.


Edward Grefenstette wrote:
> To reply to this message or start a new topic please email: BUPS-DIS at bups.org
> -
>
> Dear fellow BUPSers,
>
> With a topic title containing the word "pop" as an adjective applied  
> to "philosophy", you might come to expect a good deal of critical  
> jest directed at certain contemporary philosophers (who will remain  
> unnamed for the sake of my potential career) who publish books  
> intended for the lay community, and which some of their peers may  
> qualify as "rubbish". But rest assured, we'll have none of that here.  
> What I wish to discuss is philosophy in pop (or other) music. A while  
> back, we had a similar thread about philosophy in popular culture,  
> and – it being the summer holidays – it seems like an ideal time to  
> bring up a more 'para-academic' topic such as this one.
>
> I recently had the pleasure of listening to the NOFX song "Clams have  
> feelings too", the lyrics of which take the form of a debate between  
> two parties on the ethical implications of eating shellfish. One  
> party contends that clams have no central nervous system, and that  
> therefore – as they feel no pain – there are no qualms to be had when  
> it comes to consuming delicious clams (a position I'd support  
> regardless, out of sheer gastronomical selfishness). The other party  
> disagrees on the basis that the lack of sensory organs similar to  
> those found in other species is not grounds for claiming that clams  
> do not, nonetheless, have feelings, and that therefore it would be  
> unethical to take such epistemic leaps and conclude that eating clams  
> is okay.
>
> Now, I'm not particularly interested (at least not right within the  
> context of this topic) in hearing your arguments for or against  
> eating clams (or other animals), since – as those of you having met  
> me at conferences may know – I tend to practice a "if it tastes good,  
> damn philosophy" code of ethics when it comes to food (horrible,  
> eh?). However, I'd be very keen to hear similar anecdotes concerning  
> occurrences of philosophical discussion/debate in music that you have  
> come across.
>
> All the best,
> Edward.
>
> PS: Also, I hope you're all enjoying your summer holidays. : )
> _______________________________________________
>
> -
> Browse or search the BUPS-DIS archives, or unsubscribe from the mailing list at: http://www.bups.org/mailinglist.shtml
>