Getty Lustila is a PhD candidate (ABD) at Boston University; he works on the intersection of early modern philosophy and ethics, and has written articles on Adam Smith, John Gay, Catharine Trotter Cockburn, and David Hume. Lustila’s most recent work focuses on love and the writings of Damaris Masham.
What are you working on right now?
I’m currently putting the finishing touches on my dissertation, “The Problem of Partiality in 18th century British Moral Philosophy.” The dissertation traces the development of what I call “the problem of partiality” through the work of key figures in the British Moralist tradition.
This “problem” names the tension in our ethical thinking between our commitment to impartiality as a constitutive norm of moral judgment and conduct, and our commitment that it is permissible, or obligatory, to expend disproportionate resources promoting the good of our family, friends, and loved ones over the good of strangers. This tension challenges us to provide an account of the scope and limits of reasonable partiality that does justice to both of these commitments, which I argue is a central project of early modern ethics. The dissertation examines two attempts to tackle this latter tension – that of David Hume and Adam Smith – and brings them into conversation with Simon Keller, Niko Kolodny, Kyla Ebels-Duggan, and others. I argue that a modified version of Smith’s account of impartiality provides a more plausible solution to the problem of partiality than those currently on offer.
More recently I have turned to working on Damaris Masham (1658-1708), who is best known for A Discourse Concerning the Love of God (1696) and Occasional Thoughts in Reference to a Virtuous and Christian Life (1705). In the former, Masham enters into debate with John Norris and Mary Astell about the nature and proper object of love. For Norris and Astell, we are meant to act charitably towards others but are to reserve our love for God. Masham argues that this view is tantamount to enthusiasm and that it threatens to undercut the bonds of interpersonal love and of civil society.
Many scholars have noted Masham’s charge of enthusiasm against Norris and Astell, along with its moral implications and political ones. However, scholars have yet to examine two connections in Masham’s thought: first, her analyses of love and diagnosis of enthusiasm; second, her views about moral virtue and of political order. Most overlooked how considerations about autonomy form the backdrop of her concerns about enthusiasm. By recognizing the role of autonomy in Masham’s thought, we can shed further light on her ideas of moral and political agency.
What is your favorite thing that you’ve written?
My article, “Adam Smith and the Stoic Principle Suicide.” In terms of the writing and argumentation, I think it’s my best work. More importantly, it fulfills many of the conditions I take to be important for my own philosophical writing.
First, the paper is a product of friendship and conversation. Much of its quality can be attributed to my talking with Colin Heydt, Lauren Kopajtic, Johan Olsthoorn, Aino Lahdenranta, Rebeccah Leiby, and others at key points during the process. The paper is also a long-delayed response to a conversation that Eric Wilson and I began in 2010 about Kant on suicide.
Second, the paper weaves together my specialization – 18th century philosophy – my long-standing interest in Ancient Greek and Roman Philosophy and my reading in contemporary value theory.
Third, the paper is quite personal. Having struggled with mental illness for much of my life, the topic of suicide is quite close to me. In many ways, the paper is an attempt to grapple with my own feelings about suicide in a philosophical setting.
What do you consider your greatest accomplishment?
Becoming – so I’m told – a quite good teacher. I was not much of a student in high school, and in college I had a difficult time speaking in front of others. I remember one time in particular, where I was supposed to give a presentation on the Young Hegelians in my 19th century history class and couldn’t finish. I had to sit down and have people ask me questions. The idea of standing up in front of the class – even a small group of my peers – was too much to bear. At some point I became more comfortable with the idea of talking in front of other people. Some of this development surely had to do with being forced to do a 2/2 load of Critical Thinking my second year of my MA program (Georgia State University, 2011-12). Being thrown into managing 80 students pushed me out of my comfort zone, and allowed me to connect with the experience of my students, many of whom were largely out of their element.
Seven years down the road, in the last months of my PhD program, and six courses later (everything from Disability Ethics to Ancient Greek Philosophy), I’ve grown a great deal as a teacher. Perhaps it is these early experiences, being thrown into the process and struggling as a student early in life, that allow me to feel as comfortable as I do in front of the classroom. As everyone who teaches knows, there are few greater things, professionally speaking, than a class done well. So yes, seeing that I’ve developed into a successful educator is my greatest accomplishment.
What topic do you think is under explored in philosophy?
We’re currently experiencing a renaissance in philosophical thought. For all of the well-grounded focus on how competitive the academic job market has become, there is little comparative attention on the high quality of philosophical scholarship. I say this to remind myself of this fact – it is easy to forget the good work our colleagues are doing.
That said, there’s one area I’d like to see more front and center – mental illness (there’s of course great scholarly work on the topic). For as much as I love Elizabeth Barnes’ work, when I taught the Minority Body last year, the issue to which my students and I kept returning was the relative status of mental illness as a disability. The topic of mental illness is one of the most difficult we face as a society, due to the stigmatism it has, and the discomfort and generally lack of understanding we have towards those with mental illness.
From the perspective of an early modernist, I also find the topic interesting since mental illness crops up in various forms throughout the work of Descartes, Locke, Hume, and others.
What do you like to do outside work?
I spend most of my time listening to and thinking about music, especially hardcore and punk. Long before I was interested in philosophy, or school for that matter, I was a young upstart from Minnesota who spent most of his time skipping class, playing music, buying records, going to shows, and hanging out with friends. My fondest memories are of those times – when my friends and I couldn’t wait to get to the next sweaty, crowded, and noisy basement show.
Fast forward 17 years, and hardcore and punk music still plays a significant role in my life. I’m lucky enough to live in Boston, which has a strong, vibrant, and diverse independent music scene. Living here allows me to see new bands, and to experience that sense of bliss that comes with going to a hardcore show.
I started an instagram dedicated to my love of this music, which also incorporates my love of making lists.
Which books have changed your life? In what ways?
This is a tough question. To make things easy on myself, I’ll pick five books that had an influence on me prior to 2012 (before starting my PhD program), and say one thing that I learned from them. I choose this period because I think it had the biggest impact on my philosophical development.
1. Albert Camus, The Plague – We have to fight, even when (and especially when) there’s no hope. This book is the one that keeps me going.
2. Harry Frankfurt, The Reasons of Love – Love is volitional necessity and the source of all value. I think that he’s right.
3. Michel Foucault, History of Madness – The way we categorize people determines how we interact with them. Often these categorizations, and subsequent interactions, can be pernicious. Be vigilant. Always.
4. Adam Smith, The Theory of Moral Sentiments – I’m too close to this one. It’s my favorite piece of philosophy. It’s all there.
5. Stephen Darwall, The Second-Person Standpoint – We are accountable to one another. It can be an uncomfortable experience but it’s nonetheless true.
What’s your favorite quote?
“Make it so you can get back what you put in”
– Scott Vogel
This section of the APA Blog is designed to get to know our fellow philosophers a little better. We’re including profiles of APA members that spotlight what captures their interest not only inside the office, but also outside of it. We’d love for you to be a part of it, so please contact us via the interview nomination form here to nominate yourself or a friend.
Dr. Sabrina D. MisirHiralall is an editor at the Blog of the APA who currently teaches philosophy, religion, and education courses solely online for Montclair State University, Three Rivers Community College, and St. John’s University.
