Review of Aaron James’ “Surfing with Sartre”

Aaron James’ new book, Surfing with Sartre: An Aquatic Inquiry into a Life of Meaning, addresses major questions in philosophy from his unique perspective as both a philosophy professor and former surfer. James argues that the surfer mentality offers a unique perspective on philosophical issues like: knowledge, freedom, happiness, society, nature and the meaning of life. Why? In the introduction James says:

Surfers often have a certain natural lightness about being, about the meaning of their personal existence. Those more at sea existentially can certainly appreciate the surfer’s good fortune. And it is hard to dislike people so thoroughly enthralled by living … Surely most of us could learn to live lighter, by sliding over life’s problems. [image error](4)

 One of his salient themes is that “what the surfer knows suggests that we should … get used to an even more leisurely, surfer-friendly style of capitalism, in which we all work, but a lot less …” (5) In fact this is an ethical imperative for work “as we now practice it emits gases … that are steadily warming the planet. So … as long as we do something less consumptive of ecological resources than working … we contribute to society by making the climate change problem a little less terrible … ” (6-7) Leisure activities are thus “a new model of civic virtue. The real troublemaker is the workaholic, whose labor-intensive striving makes the problem of global warming worse …” (8)

And these are issues of profound ethical importance because:

If climate science is even roughly correct … would it be morally okay for us to further enrich ourselves in work, without limitations, if many billions of living or future people are thereby put at grave risk of profound injury? Or are we obliged to adapt? (8)

Would it really be so hard to work less, and enjoy life more? (As Europeans generally do.) While it is true that most of us derive our sense of self from our work, it doesn’t have to be that way. The Protestant work ethic nurtured capitalism, but now we should reject it and use our time more productively than for wholesale destruction of the ecosystem. This is the main point of the book, that the surfer mentality is “on the right side of history.” (9) We must adapt our lifestyles to a changing planet.

The book devotes most of its pages to the surfer mentality’s insights regarding philosophical problems, using Sartrean philosophy as its foil. Key insights include: 1) that being in the moment can replace the comfort found in work and material possessions; 2) that we should reject hard determinism, and freely choose the surfer mentality; 3) that intense pleasure and self-transcendence can be experienced from being in the flow; and 4) that a hyper competitive society destroys humanity, and nature. This leads James to state:

In a more leisurely capitalism, we’d have a less competitive way of life. We’d all work, but a lot less, and we’d spend more of our time getting attuned, living from love, practicing for its own sake, and transcending status preoccupation for a happier contentment. (288)

The book’s epilogue addresses how its insights relate to the question of life’s meaning. He begins by changing the question: “What are the meanings, plural, of life. If that’s the question … then we just enumerate the many different ways life can have meaning … Friendship. Worthy projects. Creative activity. Music. Surfing. Nice parties. Or whatever … ” (292) James then proceeds to reject that there must be one meaning that explains all these multiple meanings. So for James the meaning of life “can be nothing more than the various ways life is meaningful to us …” (292) The hard part is choosing from the many ways that life can be meaningful.

Of course this analysis ignores the question of the meaning of the cosmos itself. But even if we could discover such a meaning—say the super meaning was to enjoy an eternal feast in heaven—then we should just ask about the meaning of that. And maybe we wouldn’t like such a long party! But independent of our answer to the meaning of the universe, James’ point is that there is plenty of meaning right here and that should be enough for us.

Still James admits that many people won’t be satisfied because they want to be “part of something bigger ….” (293) Here he recommends that we just add that meaning to our list, and connect our daily activity with that meaning. The point is that “being part of a collective enterprise could never be more than one source of meaning among many on a long list … So our list of meanings can grow longer … to cover big parts of history.” (295) In fact, writes James, “… many of our activities would come to seem much less important to us if we came to know that an asteroid would destroy the planet soon after our death.” (298) So being part of history is an important part of meaning in our lives.

All this connects James back to where he began—the destruction of the biosphere.

We living people are enjoying the carbon-based prosperity party. And thought we’ll be dead before our emissions completely befoul the global ecology, if we don’t take rather dramatic steps to control their production, our story will be one of having indulged in the feast and skipped out on the check, without paying our bit, let alone helping with the dishes.

This really would not be cool. It would be a gross human failure, or, if you will, a great stain, or sin. (299)

Capitalism has brought amazing things, yet it induces the motives of self-interest that contribute to the destruction of the planet. So should we continue to enjoy the party and despoil the environment, or live a more leisurely, happier lifestyle? The sun’s light and heat brought us a planet teeming with life, but we now trap its heat in our atmosphere. Will we continue to bury our heads in the sands, or will we make a heroic effort to change things and save the world for future generations? Better people will the latter. Let’s hope they do.