Skip to content

The question

Whose work do you read even when you disagree with them?

Originally asked

Vox, to writers and thinkers, 9 Questions, 2017

Vox used this as one of nine fixed questions in its 2017 series on intellectual habits.

You answer as yourself. Nobody on FLAPSS answers as anybody else.

Kwame Anthony Appiah

Professor of philosophy and law at New York University

Recorded said elsewhere, not written here
Frank Henderson Stewart is a very distinguished scholar, now retired, an expert on the ancient Near East, but he thought deeply about honour. He read ancient texts and legal documents because, as you know, honour is a legal concept in German law and you can seek to have your honour protected in various ways – it’s sort of what they have instead of libel. Analysing and thinking deeply about it, he tries to understand how honour developed, and it was he who led me to see the core thought, which is that honour is an entitlement to respect, and that what honour codes do is say how you get to be entitled to respect. I disagree with a lot of what he says – in particular that he wants to give up on honour because it has such negative connotations: I think it needs reform as a concept – but I think it’s a very lovely piece of scholarly analysis.

Five Books interview, published transcript source ↗

Others on this question

View all 26 →
Paul Thagard Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at the University of Waterloo
That’s where I disagree with her. I don’t actually think happiness is a meaning of life, though lots of people assume that. Still, happiness is something folks care about, and she gives the best discussion I know, of the nature of happiness and the ways that one can practically accomplish it.
Recorded Five Books interview, published transcript source ↗
Lisa Randall Professor of theoretical physics at Harvard University
I read the New Yorker film critic Anthony Lane. Don’t always agree with his opinions on movies but he’s always deadly funny.
Recorded Sean Illing, Vox, “9 questions” series, 10 June 2017 source ↗
I often hate-read the Daily Mail. It’s the worst of media and the worst of mankind distilled into one publication and in some ways it feels a moral duty to be familiar with it. Too often we all bolt ourselves into an echo chamber, which I think lacks courage, and can lead to a kind of intellectual conceitedness.
Recorded Sean Illing, Vox, “9 questions” series, 26 August 2017 source ↗
Antulio J. Echevarria II Editor of the US Army War College Quarterly
This book is a great place for people to begin who want to learn more about strategy. Gray does what he says he is going to do: he talks about modern strategy. He talks about everything from the principles of nuclear strategy to the basic fundamentals of strategy itself, the importance of Clausewitz, and of strategic context. I don’t agree with everything he says, but no strategist agrees with everything another one has to say. But his book is a great place to begin.
Recorded Sophie Roell, Five Books interview, published transcript, 23 February 2017 source ↗

More on attention & the world

Also answered this

David Nasaw, John Gray, Lisa Randall, Bill Nye, Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, Paul Thagard

Search the directory for somebody in particular.

Explore further

Report this answer