According to Bertrand Russell, what is the necessary

connection between Philosophy and...

Russell argues that throughout history, the politics of a culture can influence its philosophers
and the reverse is also true, that the philosopher(s) of a given epoch and culture can
influence the politics of that given epoch and culture.
Russell notes that the Catholic Church is linked to the thinking of St. Thomas Aquinas and
that the Soviet government was linked to the philosophies of Karl Marx. In the case of
communism in the Soviet Union, those leaders (Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin) relied upon Marx's
ideologies more than using empirical (scientific) analyses in determining the best
government and social program for the Soviet Union. Russell argues that a government or
governing body that relies too much on an ideology, and not enough on empirical
observations, will necessarily fail in terms of efficiency and in terms of creating an ethical
and happy society.
Russell concludes that empiricism is the best philosophical perspective from which to advise
politics because it is based on real scientific evidence (sociological, biological,
psychological, etc.). Russell believed that a government that relies too heavily on an
ideology is destined to use force to implement that ideological framework and force is
usually required because the ideology might not conform to the real, empirical needs of a
given society. Consider the Holocaust, burning people at the stake, and relocation under
communism. Russell argues that ideologically-based governments use the "ends justify the
means" in implementing their agendas; hence all the atrocities that have been used by
some governments (Nazis) in hopes of achieving some more favorable end. Citing this
example, the "ends justify the means" is a delusional and unethical way of enforcing social
policy. Therefore, Russell shies away from any ideology that is, like the Nazi program,
functionally unethical (even evil) no matter how (and why) they might justify themselves.
When a government relies too much on a given ideology, to the detriment of their own
people (or supposed enemies), clearly that ideological perspective ignores the happiness
and actual needs of its people. A more scientific (empirical) perspective is more ethical and

useful because it addresses the actual needs of the people without having to conform to
some abstract ideology.
Russell adds that an ideology is too absolute, too unchanging and narrow-minded. He
favors democratic socialism or empiricist Liberalism as the most open-minded, scientific,
and ethical philosophical program that should be linked to a political program:

The Problems of Philosophy

Summary
The Problems of Philosophy is an introduction to the discipline of philosophy, written during a
Cambridge lectureship that Russell held in 1912. In it, Russell asks the fundamental question, Is
there any knowledge in the world which is so certain that no reasonable man could doubt it? Russell
sketches out the metaphysical and epistemological views he held at the time, views that would
develop and change over the rest of his career.
Russell begins by exploring the twin concepts of appearance and reality. Empiricists like Russell
believe that all knowledge is ultimately derived from our sensory perceptions of the world around us.
Individual perception, however, is easily affected and prone to error. If three peopleone whos had
three martinis, one with a heavy fever, and one whos color-blindlook at the same table, chances
are theyll each see the same object somewhat differently. Submerge the same table underwater, or
set it behind a wavy pane of glass, and once again the table will look different. There is, then, a
distinction to be made between appearance and reality. If perception is so variable, what can it
actually tell us about the stable, real object we assume lies behind it?
Russell coined the term sense-data in his attempt to discern the relationship between appearance
and reality. Sense-data are the particular things we perceive during the act of sensation. When you
walk into a caf, the smell of the coffee, the redness of the awning, and the heat from the radiator
are all examples of sense-data. Sense-data are the mental images (visual as well as auditory,
olfactory, tactile, and gustatory) we receive from a given object in the physical world. As we can see
from the table example, the same object can produce variable sense-data. Sense-data are related to
the physical objects they represent, but the exact nature of this relationship is unclear. The skeptical
argument contends that sense-data tell us nothing about the reality of the object. Russell had a
commonsense take on the matter: while he understood the skeptical arguments, he found no reason
to believe them. A hundred different viewers may have a thousand different kinds of sense-data for a
given table, yet each agrees that they are looking at the same table. This consistency suggests, to

Russell, that we must at least believe in the existence of a single, particular, real table. To this
instinctive belief, Russell also adds the hypothesis that physical objects causethe sense-data we
receive and therefore correspond to them in some significant way.
During the act of sensation (i.e., the exercising of our five senses), we receive and process the
sense-data produced by physical objects in our vicinity. The knowledge we gain during this process
Russell calls perceptual knowledgeknowledge gained through experience. In contrast, Russell
believes we are also in possession of certain kinds of a priori knowledge. These include the selfevident rules of logic, most important, and those of mathematics. Perceptual knowledge (the
knowledge of things) and a priori knowledge (the knowledge of truths) work in concert: the first gives
us empirical data, and the second tells us how to process that data.
Russell further divides human knowledge into knowledge by acquaintance and knowledge by
description. To be acquainted with something is to be directly and immediately aware of it, without
the action of an intermediary. When you sit on a red plastic chair, you become acquainted with lots of
sense-data associated with that chair. You know its redness, its smoothness, its coolness, and its
hardness. But to know that this thing is called a chair and that its often found in the company of
other chairs and something called a table requires more than just direct, immediate acquaintance
with the physical object. To know all that requires us to make inferences, based on our general
knowledge of facts and on our acquaintance with other similar objects. This kind of knowledge is
derivative, and Russell terms it knowledge by description. For instance, most of us know only by
description that Everest is the tallest mountain in the world. Few of us have actually been there, so
we have to rely on the testimony of others to know that fact. Indeed, to truly be acquainted with the
fact of Everests superior height, one would have to visit and measure all the mountains in the world.
Its probably safe to say, then, that no one is truly acquainted with that particular piece of knowledge.
Just as we can know objects either immediately or derivatively, we can also know truths immediately
or derivatively. Russell defines immediate knowledge of truths as intuitive truths. These are concepts
that, to Russell, are so clearly self-evident that we just know they must be true. 1 + 1 = 2 is an
example of such a self-evident truth. Derivative knowledge of truths involves deduction and
inference from immediate, self-evident truths.