Between Slavery and Freedom: Philosophy and American Slavery

by Howard McGary, Bill E. Lawson

Using the writings of slaves and former slaves, as well as commentaries on slavery, Between Slavery and Freedom explores the American slave experience to gain a better understanding of six moral and political concepts - oppression, paternalism, resistance, political obligation, citizenship, and forgiveness. The authors use analytical philosophy as well as other disciplines to gain insight into the thinking of a group of people prevented from participating in the social/political discourse of their times. Between Slavery and Freedom rejects the notion that philosophers need not consider individual experience because philosophy is 'impartial' and 'universal'. A philosopher should also take account of matters that are essentially perspectival, such as the slave experience. McGary and Lawson demonstrate the contribution of all human experience, including slave experiences, to the quest for human knowledge and understanding.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction

176 pages, Hardcover

First published December 1, 1992

Reviews

[Nick Imrie · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was a very interesting book, but not at all what I was expecting. The title didn't really describe the book - 'Between Slavery and Freedom' suggests that it might explore the difficulties of acheiving freedom, the difference between them, the brutal suppression of black people's struggle to acheive their full rights, but none of these essays were really about that. Each essay addressed a particular concept in relation to slavery: oppression, paternalism, resistance, citizenship, moral discourse, and forgiveness; and there's not really any unifying argument to link them together, just the subject matter of slavery. The blurb promises to 'explore the American slave experience to gain a better understanding of six moral and political concepts', but there's almost no reference to specific examples. The book is much heavier on philosophy and lighter on history than I expected.

In some ways this is very interesting. Every chapter thoroughly explores the concept before discussing it in relation to slavery, and in many cases these were concepts I hadn't considered very carefully before. For example, we all have a general understanding of oppression as a bad thing, where someone is subject to the cruel or exploitative authority of another. But what is it exactly? And what makes slavery so much worse than other forms of oppression? Is it the appalling cruelty, the fact of being owned, the destruction of families, or one of the hundred other miseries and indignities?

Other essays, like 'Forgiveness and Slavery' went a bit too far with the defining. Look, I know it's philosophy, so I should have expected close attention to the meaning of words - but the chapter went on for ages over whether forgiveness was a feeling, emotion, or action; and all the various reasons why it might be one or the other; and its role in various religions; before finally coming around to a hasty look at slavery and forgiveness in the last few pages. Perhaps the essay would have said more about its subject matter if the author had just picked a definition and run with it?

All of the essays had a very plodding thoroughness to them (perhaps this is feature of analytic philosophy?). The essay on paternalism took all the various definitions of paternal, one by one, and explained why they could not really apply in the case of slavery. This was interesting, logical, and very very thorough; but it's also somewhat strange to see these weaselling justifications being demolished. They seem so threadbare that it's hard to believe that anyone could have put them forward with a straight face. You have to remind yourself that the author really isn't knocking down strawmen - people actually believed the most spurious claims that slavery was for the good of the slaves and that owners were as responsible as parents. Easy, obvious examples put forward by the author include: if you separate mothers and young children for the sake of profit you are not being very fatherly. If you have to use whips to force people to work for you then you're probably not doing them a favour).

I recommend it to everyone interested in any of the concepts, but not for anyone looking for history or details of slavery in the United States.