Opus 2024-337: Bill Clinton, Philosopher

Much humor has been aimed at Bill Clinton and his statement, “It all depends what the meaning of “is” is”.  Now we know that he was just trying to dodge the questions being asked him.  We know him.  We know his character, or lack of it.  We know him as a philanderer and all kinds of other things.  So we don’t think of him as being a great philosopher.  And yet what he said is at the root of many frustrations, as we go through our daily lives.

In many ways, it is a central question of modern culture, what is the meaning of “is.”

Of course, you have to substitute other words for “is”, but the principal is the same.  We are in the age of deconstruction.  This is a philosophy that says we can change the meanings of words to fit the circumstances.  Obviously, there are words that are based on context.  My favorite example of this is the word “can”.  It can be a verb.  It can be a noun. It can be all kinds of different meanings.  It all depends on context.  Even something as basic, as murder requires a genuine definition.  The Bible even gives us examples of first-degree murder as opposed to manslaughter.  The meaning is situational but not arbitrary.  

So yes, it does depend on what the meaning of “is”, is.  We might even come to give this its own name, and call it the “Is Question” ranking it right up there with the Pythagorean theorem or What is “truth?”

I am not a prophet, nor the son of a prophet, but let me make a prophecy.  Bill Clinton will go down in history as the man who polluted the oval office.  He will also go down in history as one of the great philosophers for asking one of the great questions.

It’s a sad statement about the condition of both politics and philosophy.

homo unius libri