Rae Langton
New York City
28 March 2003

My parents once cautioned me, recalling St. Paul's warning to 'beware of vain philosophy'. (Was he warning against philosophy, or only vain philosophy? You're condemned to do some philosophy just to grasp the warning.) Alas, I fell for philosophy anyway, and perhaps for vain philosophy. I've argued that Kant's claim about our ignorance of things in themselves is a claim about ignorance of the intrinsic nature of things. In vain-I've persuaded no-one. In political philosophy I've argued (along with others) that pornography subordinates women. Again in vain-we've persuaded no-one. Philosophy needn't be vain: it helps us understand the world, and sometimes change it for the better. But its pull is not in its utility. As Adam Smith said: 'wonder...and not any expectation of advantage from its discoveries, is the first principle which prompts [us] to the study of philosophy'.