I have warm feelings about the Vienna Circle because it was a collection of brilliant people who came together at an interesting time and place, but I do think that some of their followers went too far in reducing philosophy to logic and dismissing legitmate questions as "nonsense" in an aggressive and shaming way. The early Wittgenstein of the Tractatus was one of the villians, but he repudiated his earlier works and by the time these ladies came around he had gone far enough into new directions that he could be a guide and mentor for them. The four women who are the subject to of this book helped to redirect philosophy into a more humane and interesting direction that recoginized that people are far more than calculating machines. As the title says, we are metaphysical animals, so we cannot be fully understood without considering our spiritual, irrational, social and emotional qualities. The void that men left when they were sent off to the front made space for women in all fields, and British philosophy was transformed by this shift. Philosophy from a female perspective allowed for a genuine curiosity freed from the posturing and arrogance so many young men would bring into the classroom, and allowed the influence that their friendships, romances (and later on, experiences as mothers) had on them to shape their views. It's particularly interesting to juxtapose these to those of the solitary existences of the men, most often unmarried, who are overwhelmingly taught as the great philosophical thinkers. Le Guin puts forth a similar view on this subject in Dancing at the Edge of the World: Thoughts on Words, Women, Places. Adding to its fragmentary quality is the peculiar use of first names throughout the book. What actually brought this book to my attention was a review of it in Philosophy Now Magazine, where the reviewer criticized the authors’ use of first names for the women, but not for the men. While this is actually far from accurate, the alternative is not much better. It is true that the authors only refer to the women as Iris, Mary, Elizabeth, and Philippa, but they are inconsistent with the men and other women, at one point even referring to Rousseau as ‘Jean-Jacques’ weirdly enough. Wittgenstein is never referred to as ‘Ludwig’ unless in combination with his last name. A.J. Ayer is referred to as ‘Freddie Ayer,’ ‘A.J. Ayer,’ or simply ‘Freddie.’ And so on. I will make no attempt to critique this issue of naming from a feminist perspective and I can only assume the authors’ intention is to further humanize these women (although Ludwig’s personal life is discussed just as much as his philosophy as well…One could argue he is better known by his last name than his first so it is meant to be clear, but this is just as true for Murdoch, Midgley, Anscombe, and Foot, as well as *cough cough* Jean-Jacques??) I mainly note this because to me it added to the confusion I was already experiencing.

A vibrant portrait of four college friends—Iris Murdoch, Philippa Foot, Elizabeth Anscombe, and Mary Midgley—who formed a new philosophical tradition while Oxford's men were away fighting World War II. Spectacularly clever . . . Cozy and yet cosmic, Metaphysical Animals is a great choice for amateur philosophers and appreciators of well-written, history-making accounts alike.” Metaphysical Animals is both story and argument. The story is a fine one. Elizabeth Anscombe, Iris Murdoch, Philippa Foot and Mary Midgley were students at Oxford during the second world war. They found a world in which many of the men were absent. Those who remained were either too old or too principled to fight. It was a world, as Midgley later put it, where women’s voices could be heard. Even within its own defined terms, Metaphysical Animals isn’t entirely convincing in making its case. It’s hard to get an objective sense of where these four women stood in terms of influence in the greater scheme of philosophy, either as individuals or as a group. Indeed, it’s not entirely clear whether they ever amounted to a group beyond being friends.

Select a format:

Cumhail and Wiseman provide a list of players at the front of the text. This was a smart decision as real life doesn't limit itself to a small list of characters which readers can easily follow. However, I was confused at times by the choice of using first and last, only first, or only last names. A few weeks ago I finished reading The Women Are Up to Something by Benjamin J.B. Lipscomb & found it an excellent book. This is yet another excellent book about four female philosophers who “set to work on an account of human life, action & perception that could reconnect morality with what really matters.” And what did Elizabeth Anscombe, Mary Midgley, Iris Murdoch & Philippa Foot think really matters? Seeing the everyday reality of our world, of people’s lives, “as something astonishing & fragile & in need of constant care & attention.” It is not a world where moral language is reduced to dictionary definitions, but where language is woven “together to create living patterns of significance & sense.” Then World War 2 happened, and Ayer and the other male proponents of logical positivism went off to war, leaving an Oxford filled with women as well as older men and refugees who could not serve (such as Ludwig Wittgenstein, whose pupil, translator, and editor Anscombe became). Our four protagonists, temporarily free to develop their own views now that the men weren't using up all the oxygen, began to develop a moral philosophy that challenged Ayer's position. Reports of the atrocities of Nazi death camps as well as the use of atomic bombs against Japan further galvanized the four women to find an objective basis for saying why such actions are wrong. In light of these events, it was just not good enough to relegate morality to mere subjective, emotional preference, as the logical positivists were doing. After the war ended, the women continued along this path. In a disintegrating or changing world, it is easy to lose sight of what really matters for human life going well, and of which kinds of harms are of serious importance.

NATIONAL BOOK CRITICS CIRCLE AWARD FINALIST •A BEST BOOK OF THE YEAR : TheNew York Times Book Review, The New Yorker It’s a compelling story, about four brilliant thinkers . . .This is a world where people gossip. This is a world that is — that most criminally unphilosophical of all things perhaps — cozy. . .It might not always be recognizably “philosophical”— but this is the point of the book .. .a masterful argument, made not only by the book’s content, but by its form. Philosophy and life are united, the book seems to be saying: not only by default, but as upbringing; as education. A philosophical life is a life lived with others — however cozy those relationships might be.”Elizabeth meets Wittgenstein. She is perplexed but she has religious faith which makes her serious. There are complications along the way. Murdoch, in particular, has a habit of both falling in love and being fallen for. She almost irrevocably damages her friendship with Foot by causing and then breaking a complicated love quadrilateral. Her admiration for Anscombe shades into the erotic. But, in and out of each others’ orbit, they start to find alternative ways of thinking about human beings, drawing on insights from Aristotle, Aquinas and Wittgenstein. Anscombe and Foot develop formidable reputations in academic philosophy. Murdoch’s beautiful, challenging philosophical writing gives way to a career as an acclaimed novelist and woman of letters. Midgley is the most grounded of the quartet, bringing philosophy into conversation with zoology and ethology and publishing the first of her 18 books when she is 59. The history of European philosophy is usually constructed from the work of men. In Metaphysical Animals, a pioneering group biography, Clare Mac Cumhaill and Rachael Wiseman offer a compelling alternative. In the mid-twentieth century Elizabeth Anscombe, Mary Midgley, Philippa Foot, and Iris Murdoch were philosophy students at Oxford when most male undergraduates and many tutors were conscripted away to fight in the Second World War. Together, these young women, all friends, developed a philosophy that could respond to the war’s darkest revelations. The narrative is of four brilliant women finding their voices, opposing received wisdom, and developing an alternative picture of human beings and their place in the world . . . To read this story is to be reminded . . . that the life of the mind can be as intense and eventful as friendship itself.” What is particularly captivating about this area of philosophy is that it is deeply concerned about everyday life. While metaphysics is often thought of as something so abstract that it has no practical value, this isn't the case. How a human being is conceptualized and how we think of reality deeply impact how we view the world and live our lives. Such questions are always having an impact, regardless if they are pondered or not.

A NEW YORK TIMES BOOK REVIEW BEST BOOK OF THE YEAR - A vibrant portrait of four college friends--Iris Murdoch, Philippa Foot, Elizabeth Anscombe, and Mary Midgley--who formed a new philosophical tradition while Oxford's men were away fighting World War II. But we humans are metaphysical animals. We dwell in the past as well as the present…We make promises & imagine our futures. It is part of our nature to question.”The authors spend some time discussing Susan Stebbings-should have been longer- and Freddie Ayer, and his soul-destroying positivism. Love can motivate us in a way that involves desire, but not self-interest.“ And describing the conversations, Elizabeth, Iris, Mary and Philippa had about Mary Glover‘s paper, “Obligation and value.” In philosophy, 'one must start from scratch,' Elizabeth had told Iris after the war, '—& it takes a very long time to reach scratch.' The second theme is metaphysics, as alluded to by the title. We are indeed metaphysical animals, and this cannot be denied. The book beautifully explores the connections between history and philosophy, which is unusually tight in this period. At the beginning of the century, philosophy in Britain was occupied by Idealist metaphysicians vastly influenced by Hegel, seeking complex metaphysics where the goal was to seek the unified whole, the Absolute. This was the task of philosophy.

Overall, for readers interested in philosophy or even just this cultural period, this is an enjoyable and rewarding book about four fascinating women whose philosophy deserves more attention. It will probably make you want to read more by these thinkers, and it might even make you want to "do" philosophy! It's a well-edited piece, it’s also quite dense, and there were times when the detail was a little overwhelming. But it also comes with extensive notes and useful suggestions for further reading, as well as an impressive list of contemporary thinkers whose work has been influenced by one or more of these women.The book begins with two short vignettes: one about Elizabeth Anscombe’s speech against the awarding of an honorary degree by oxford to Harry Truman. The other is Philippa foot, writing a very long letter, pleading that Somerville offer Elizabeth a job. A truly detailed exploration of the lives of four of the women who broke philosophical ground at Oxford, and a close examination of their thoughts about philosophy, religion and politics. This kind of book is often riddled with speculation, but the authors interviewed Mary Midgley as a primary source, who was the only one still alive before this book was published. She sadly passed away in 2018. In part due to how abstract Hegel is, that leads to a counter-reaction of logical positivism, which reject all metaphysics as meaningless. The only thing that mattered was things that were empirically verified. This was further emphasized by advances in technology at the time. It was felt that science was all that was needed, and philosophy was simply a huge misunderstanding if not outright fraud with absurd metaphysical systems. Anscombe, Murdoch, Midgley and Foot were not fans of logical positivism dogmatism or conclusions. Fortunately for them, if not for the world, the second world war intervened in their studies, removing Ayer and his acolytes from Oxford, and bringing a large influx of European émigré philosophers.