Soohyun Ahn is a PhD candidate in Philosophy at the University of Calgary, working in the philosophy of science under Dr. Marc Ereshefsky. Her research is about how non-epistemic values (social, moral, and political values) affect scientific classifications. One of the questions she is currently working on is how epistemic and non-epistemic considerations should be balanced in classificatory projects.
What are you most proud of in your professional life?
I am really proud of winning the Izaak Walton Killam Pre-Doctoral Scholarship, the most prestigious graduate student award at the University of Calgary. It was late spring, 2017. I had just returned to the program to complete my coursework and field of study exams, after taking a short maternity leave. Juggling my role as a PhD student and my role as a new mother, I was questioning my ability to do philosophy and to complete my degree. I couldn’t believe that I won such an honorable award; so naturally I assumed that it was a scam. (My suspicions were strengthened when I saw the link that asked me to submit my banking information!) Receiving the Killam award means so much more than material support. It gave me the sense of accomplishment and confidence I needed to overcome my self-doubt and fully engage with my research.
What are you reading right now? Would you recommend it?
Right now, I am reading Automating Inequality: How High-Tech Tools Profile, Police, and Punish the Poor (2018) by Virginia Eubanks. Simply stated, this book is about the downside of the digital age and more. The author presents the stories of real people whose lives are deeply affected by automated social services; they are eye-opening, and sometimes heart-wrenching. What is special about this book, and what scares me the most, is that the technicians who created high-tech tools, and the social service administrators who adopted the tools, did so with good intentions. No one wants social service system to fail nor do they want the social safety net breakdown. It is appalling to see how the coupling of high-tech tools and the good intentions of helping people in need or of alleviating inequality can go wrong. This book is a good reference point for those who believe the idea that algorithmic decision-making is value-free, and therefore the best means to resolve social inequality. I am teaching Information Technology Ethics this spring and this book inspired me to have social justice as a central, overarching theme for my course.
What’s your most treasured memory?
The last day of October 2016. Lying in bed, gently holding my husband’s hand, waiting for my little angel to come to the earth! The peaceful moment lasted only a few minutes, but I recall it as the happiest moment in my life. The sun was shining through the window, brightly filling the entire room. Doctors and nurses leisurely came and went checking up on how I was feeling. I felt like as if the whole world was revolving around me. Imagining the impending delivery was scary, of course, but at the same time I was so excited about the meeting my baby.
If you could have a one-hour conversation with any philosopher or historical figure from any time, who would you pick and what topic would you choose?
A one-hour talk with any philosopher would be way too short! I want to spend at least a week with a philosopher from the past. The first philosopher that comes to mind is Kant. I want to follow him on his daily schedule. I like to keep regular hours so I would probably be a good companion. Regarding the topic, I don’t know. Well, what I want to do Is to just chat with him rather than a philosophical debate. I want to spend my time with him as a person, not as a philosopher. I presume that Kant likes talking about everything and he can be very talkative. My guess is not unreasonable. Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View (1798), one of his later books, is about actual human beings as citizens of the world, and it contains many interesting observations. For example, Kant states that: “Many people are unhappy because they cannot engage in abstraction. Many a suitor could make a good marriage if he could only shut his eyes to a wart [132] on his sweetheart’s face, or to a gap where teeth are missing.” (15).
There are many (relatively) hilarious remarks Kant made. So, I think I and Kant could chat about anything for hours.
Who is your favorite philosopher and why?
Again, my answer is Kant. I don’t want to call him my #1 philosopher, but I am in a love-hate relationship with him. I have very mixed feelings. I disagree with him on so many things in philosophy. Nevertheless, it is a quote from his book that guides me when I am struggling with making ethical decisions.
“People think here that sympathy for another’s plight, and kindness of heart, consist merely in feelings and wishes. Yet he who pays no heed at all to the wretchedness of others, where he can be of no help, and who is indifferent to all misfortune that cannot be altered, but takes trouble only where he can do something and be of help, is in fact a practical man, and his heart is a kind one, because it is active, even though he makes no such parade of it as others, who sympathize by wishes, merely, and already see friendship in that.” (Lectures on Ethics 27:422; emphasis added)
The way I view a Kantian moral agent is different from the traditional understanding. For me, a Kantian agent is the person who understands the difference between “benevolence in wishes” and active and practical benevolence. I don’t want to be a person who is callous towards people’s plight; nor do I want to be a person who is oversensitive to others’ predicaments. I tend to be the latter and it is painful. According to the quote, Kant asks us to be in the middle. What Kant has in mind is not the person who is overly compassionate, sacrifices his or her life to do good for others, but eventually burns out. We are morally required to actively engage in efforts to mitigate the sufferings of others and to make the world a better place. But we should keep in mind to only do good things within our capacity. So, here comes another duty as a moral agent. Our self-images partly decide whether we can be of help to others. Consequently, the development of our sensitivity, toward others, becomes an indirect duty for becoming virtuous.
References
Kant, Immanuel. 1978. Anthropology From a Pragmatic Point of View. Edited by Hans H. Rudnick. Southern Illinois University Press.
———. 1997. Lectures on Ethics. Edited by Peter Heath and J.B. Schneewind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
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.
I loved this interview. Thank you for sharing so candidly, Soohyun Ahn!
If you are looking for the best foundation for helping the poor and needy. Seek Aid is the global largest and most trustworthy giving platform for donors. Non profit organization