8/6/2019 Dear Phil an Epistolary Discourse No 6

1/3

Dear Phil: An Epistolary Discourse #6

By Frank C. Bertrand

[NOTE: This first appeared at the original philipkdickfans.com website,created and so ably administered by Jason Koornick, in the second half of2001. Please see Discourse #1 for an Introduction to the series of six thatwere completed]

Dear Phil,

I must confess, Phil, that Ive been spending way too much time puzzling over those twophrases in the section of your Exegesisdevoted to writing techniques, Yes, I meanfictionalizing philosopher and someone mustcome along & play the role of Plato tomy Socrates. No doubt I should, instead, be gleefully pursuing the quick and

convenient lifestyle of money and materialism by consuming whatever is in fad atsundry drive-up-windows, or college campuses, across this land. Or, watching re-runsof that epitome of todays American culture, the Jerry Springer Show.

Nonetheless, there are a few individuals who find your fiction and non-fictionexemplifying, indeed, the work of a fictionalizing philosopher. Larry Sutin writes, in hisIntroduction to The Shifting Realities Of Philip K. Dick:

One can dub him a philosopher, and indeed he warrants the title

in its original Greek meaning as one who loved wisdom and truly

believed in the value of uninhibited questioning a rarity in this

day and age, in which the word metaphysical has become asynonym for pointlessness.

And S.J. Umland, in his Introduction to Philip K. Dick: Contemporary CriticalInterpretations, states that you inherited the philosophical skepticism that has beenone of the more profound and lasting effects of the cold war. Then we have GreggRickman, who, in his Preface to Philip K. Dick: In His Own Words, claims The daymay come when Phils reputation as a philosopher exceeds his (large and growing)reputation as a science fiction writer. He would be amused. But D. Scott Apel, editor ofPhilip K. Dick: The Dream Connection, perhaps says it best in a recent interview:

It was the unknown side of Phil that he probably was a philosopherin a world where philosophy has pretty much been replaced by

technology. We got science now, what do we need philosophy for?

We can find out what works, and whats real, and nobody really needs

to speculate about it. If you want to be a philosopher you go be a

Physicist. But Phil was a traditional, classical Philosopher, and maybe

one of the best.

8/6/2019 Dear Phil an Epistolary Discourse No 6

2/3

So, Phil, are you amused?

I mean, it seems to me that if anyone bothered to read, and actually think about(uninhibited questioning, speculate), your first published short story, Beyond LiesThe Wub, they would note that the Wub says, Rather you should discuss questions

with me, philosophy, the arts And thats just what you proceed to do, Phil, from thereon out, discuss questions of philosophy and the arts, duh! If thats not setting off asignal-flare to try and point the way, I dont know what is. Its also not surprising, regardsthis, that you allude, more than once in your work, to Pythagoras. He was, apparently,the first to describe himself as a Philosopher. It was he who distinguished the sophiasought by philosophers from the practical shrewdness of merchants and the trainedskills of athletes. And this Sophia, according to one of your two favorite reference works,The Encyclopedia Of Philosophy, had a much wider range of application than themodern English wisdom, That is, philosophiaetymologically connotes the love ofexercising ones curiosity and intelligence, rather than the love of wisdom.

Now, I would argue that what you and the Wub strive to do, by word and by deed, is toexercise your curiosity and intelligence, with Epicurean overtones. By this I mean theoriginal intent of Epicurus teachings at the Athenian community established in 307-306B.C., named The Garden not those attributed to him by his accusatory detractors(Stoics, mostly), nor the hilarious caricature by Rabelais in book one of Gargantua,called Abbey of Thlme. And what Epicurus intent was is pretty clear because, eventhough most of what he actually wrote has been lost, reliable outlines and summaries ofmany of his works still exist, one of which is be someone, Phil, you admire and alludeto, Lucretius. Ya, him, the Epicurean philosopher who lived some 250 years afterEpicurus, in Rome, and whose major work, De Rerum Natura, you give excerpts from(primarily the Dryden translation) in The Selected Letters. It seems that Lucretiusdetractors accused him of denying the humanity of God while asserting the divinity ofMan, and that his book is a Bible for unbelievers.

Anyways, according to Epicurus, the experience of pleasure, while good in itself,doesnt include a guarantee of permanence. Whats also required is intelligent dhoice.And he states that practical wisdom is more valuable than philosophy itself because itmeasures pleasure against pain. That is, it rejects pleasures that lead to great painwhile accepting pains that lead to greater pleasures.

Isnt this what the Wub ends up doing, Phil? Furthermore, for the good life of the mindand body, katastematic pleasures are more important than kinetic ones. While onewould no doubt feel chara(delight) about the well being of their body (kinetic), theywould really enjoy ataraxia(peace of mind) with the removal of cares and pains(katastematic). As examples of the latter, Epicurus cites the study of natural philosophyremoving fear of the gods, and recognizing death to be merely the limit of experience.

I strongly suspect that both you and the Wub would prefer The Garden and ataraxia.More importantly, I now think I better understand how and why you fictionalized

8/6/2019 Dear Phil an Epistolary Discourse No 6

3/3

Epicuruss philosophy in, at least, Beyond Lies The Wub. But Im still working on whysomeone must play the role of Plato to your Socrates.

Would you give me a hint, or two?

Yours in Kipple,Frank