Sophia Whicher just completed her MA in Philosophy at the University of Toronto. She is interested in the philosophy of love and personal relationships, and feminist philosophy. In her spare time, she enjoys engaging in sparkly conversations with her loved ones, traveling, and eating good food.
What excites you about philosophy?
What excites me about philosophy as a practice is the way it encourages us to be curious about ourselves and the world. I think philosophy is important because it demands that we question the assumptions operating in the background of our interactions with the texts we read, the media we consume, and, of course, one another. I think that approaching tricky conversations with a philosophical attitude gives us a lens through which to be both inquisitive and non-combative. For me, a philosophical attitude is one that aims not at clinging to one’s own point of view above all others to be ‘right’, but rather aims at the truth. If we are really interested in the truth, and we take standpoint epistemology seriously, then we should first and foremost assume that other people’s experiences and the insights these experiences give them access to are sources of valuable information. It becomes our task to, collectively, work out what each of our viewpoints tells us about each other and the world, and how we might be able to reconcile them with one another and navigate the (often messier) picture of the world we are faced with as a result. So embracing a philosophical attitude gives us a way to approach conflict that does not pit us essentially against one another, but rather asks us to see our conversational counterparts as partners rather than opponents.
What are you working on right now?
Right now, I am working on a paper that explores the connection between meaning in life and our personal relationships. I argue that an important and overlooked dimension of meaning in life is the phenomenon of experiencing value together. Furthermore, I argue that an intrinsic good of our personal relationships is the way that they contribute to meaning in life by allowing us to experience value together– perhaps particularly value that is grounded in shared relational history.
I am also working on writing cases for Ethics Bowl Canada. The Ethics Bowl (which originated in the States), is a country-wide initiative that is very similar to a debate club, except that instead of encouraging its participants to cling to a particular position in order to win a round, we encourage participants to prioritize getting closer to the truth. Each round involves two cases that address different (but often related) ethical issues. Team A articulates their view on Case 1, and then Team B provides an objection or asks for further elaboration on what Team A presented. Team A then responds to this objection or request for elaboration, often by revising their original position. The teams switch roles to address Case 2. I am passionate about public philosophy and pedagogy, and I love how the Ethics Bowl makes philosophy as a practice (and not just something to read) more accessible.
What’s your favorite quote?
I have two:
“The moment we choose to love we begin to move towards freedom, to act in ways that liberate ourselves and others.” – bell hooks
“Isn’t it splendid to think of all the things there are to find out about? It just makes me glad to be alive– it’s such an interesting world. It wouldn’t be half so interesting if we know all about everything, would it? There’d be no scope for the imagination then, would there?” – L. M. Montgomery in Anne of Green Gables
What’s your poison? (Favorite drink.)
I’m a Gin and Tonic girl, and I love a glass of Sangiovese. I also love martinis, but I think what makes me love them so much is the ‘aesthetic’. By ‘aesthetic’ I mean the whole vibe that sitting in a bar sipping a martini gives off. I associate martinis with being fancy, independent, and a little mysterious. Once I took myself out to a nice bar, and I was looking forward to sitting down to read Amia Srinivasan’s The Right to Sex: Feminism in the 21st Century and sipping a martini (totally not inspired by the first line of this article). The bar was particularly busy, and I think all of their martini glasses must have been in use because mine came in a snifter glass. The audacity! But seriously, I could hardly get through a couple of sips of it. I think the intuitive explanation for this is that I don’t actually like the taste of martinis, but their ‘vibe’ makes the experience of drinking one pleasurable on the whole: feeling fancy and independent and a little mysterious outweighs the bad taste. And that vibe just happens to depend on the martini being clearly distinguishable as a martini, which requires it to be served in the proper glass. But this explanation doesn’t fit with my experience at all; the vibe actually makes the martini itself taste better, I swear! What’s going on here?
It’s actually quite fitting that I was reading The Right to Sex when I came to this realization about martinis. In two of the essays in this book (“The Right to Sex” and “Coda: The Politics of Desire”), Srinivasan makes an important observation about our desires (specifically, our sexual desires): Our desires are not innate, and they are not formed in a vacuum; they are shaped by the world around us (for instance, they are shaped by the oppressive beauty standards that are perpetuated through media). Srinivasan asks us to consider what it would mean to ‘liberate’ our desires from the oppressive social structures in which they are formed. Liberating our desires does not mean rejecting or repressing them, or labeling some of them ‘good’ and some of them ‘bad’. It just means being curious about where they come from, asking ourselves if they really are ours, what they tell us about ourselves and the world around us, and what it would mean to want otherwise. It means affirming our agency by untangling what we want from what politics tries to choose for us. I wonder what it would mean to liberate all of our preferences in this way. To be more curious about why we like the things we do. Not only can this affirm our agency, but I think it can also get us closer to the truth. Liking martinis isn’t a particularly political preference, but hey, being curious about my experience with the snifter-martini has led me to question the assumption that taste is an ‘autonomous’ preference, divorced from our other aesthetic sensibilities… and I think that is a valuable philosophical insight!
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.
Alexis LaBar has a Master’s degree in Philosophy from West Chester University of Pennsylvania. Before attending West Chester, she graduated from Moravian University with a Bachelor’s in Philosophy, a minor in Global Religions, and an Ethics certificate. She is the recipient of the 2022 Claghorn Award in Philosophy, awarded by West Chester University, and the 2021 Douglas Anderson Prize in Philosophy, awarded by Moravian University. She is the Editor of the Teaching Beat and Work/Life Balance Beat.
