Professor gives expert advice
for anonymous manuscript
By Anna Herkamp
Summer
Reporter
One of the things humanities scholars do in addition
to their educational responsibilities is "referee" certain documents
up for publication.
Often the publishers are from other universities
or educational institutions. Sometimes independent institutions will
ask for a professor's expertise on a certain piece of writing.
"So-called 'consulting' jobs in the humanities
are exceptionally rare and are non-existent for significant sums of
money," said Jan Cover, director of graduate studies in philosophy,
in a memo.
Cover, as well as several other philosophy experts
from around the United States and Europe, recently reviewed a mysterious
piece called "Coming to Understanding," by an anonymous author.
Cover found out about the manuscript on the Internet.
Mike Bergmann, assistant professor of philosophy,
saw it first and mentioned it to Cover. Cover wrote the institute, called
the A.M. Monius Institute, and told them he would be interested in offering
his opinion for the document.
The association then sent him a letter asking for
some of his publishing credentials and areas of study. They accepted
his offer and sent him a contract he signed. The contract said he would
be paid $12,000 — an almost unheard of amount — for his services.
Normally, when the opportunity arises to critique
a philosophical document, the publisher will ask the professor directly
for their expert opinion, said Bergmann. The payment is usually only
a few hundred dollars, he said.
The other oddity of the situation is that the author
of this particular document was unknown. Because of this fact, the whole
thing seemed a little shady. However, the legal contract was professional
and Cover decided to just "play the game" and see how it turned out.
It's not that there was no author listed on the
manuscript, it's just that any philosophically educated professor would
know that the name A.M. Monius was probably a pen name.
The journalist, James Ryerson, who wrote about
the mysterious writer of the A. M. Monius Institute for the journal
Lingua Franca did a little research into the "A. M. Monius" name. He
found that two classic philosophy Neoplatonist scholars had the name
Ammonius.
Ammonius, son of Hermeas, produced commentaries
on Aristotle's works, including "On Aristotle's Categories." The other
Ammonius, Ammonius Saccas, who is thought by many to be the founder
of Neoplatonism, swore his followers to secrecy about his teachings.
Few classical scholars who knew of either of these
knew of any individuals who would have over $100,000 to pay university
professors to review his or her work.
Cover admitted he wondered if his check would actually
come. As it turned out, it, and the checks of all the other scholars,
did come. All were paid in full.
None of the other scholars in the project knew
or understood the mystery of the Ammonius alias, or how the project
was funded.
Despite the strangeness of the whole situation,
Cover still decided to go ahead and fulfill his end of the contract
for two reasons.
The document was philosophically interesting and
provocative to read, Cover said. And of course, the more obvious and
rather "embarrassing" reason he decided to do it was the money. $12,000
was enough to persuade most of the other scholars as well.
Cover said, the writer had a sophisticated level
of understanding behind his ideas.
The focus of the document was the question of the
purpose of contingent beings. Contingent beings are beings, such as
people, that exist, which "don't have to." The study of these types
of questions and others like them encompasses the study of metaphysics.
"Metaphysics is the study of what there is and
the fundamental nature of what there is," said Cover. Topics or questions
metaphysics entails are the existence of God, free will, determinism,
causality, possibility and freedom.
The manuscript itself turned out to have been written
by a "smart, ambitious author," said Cover. Monius's answer to the question
of contingent beings existence is best summed up by Cover: contingent
beings exist for the sake of coming to understanding (hence the name
of the manuscript) their being. The structure of beings is such that
it requires that there are contingent beings with this purpose of "coming
to understanding."
Cover said reviewing the manuscript was both rewarding
and frustrating. It was rewarding because he had the opportunity to
think about an intrinsically difficult question. It was frustrating
because the ideas were difficult, he said.
The author chose to remain anonymous because it
safeguarded members of the project from disregarding his work as "amateur,"
said Cover. "It forced people to simply attend to the document itself
apart from the author."
Through a little investigative reporting, Ryerson
did eventually discover the identity of the mysterious author.
He tracked down the author to Princeton, N.J.,
where an institution called The Institutum Philosophiae Naturalis was
"formed to encourage theoretical and epistemological inquiries in the
physical, natural and social sciences which, because of their unusual
scope or method, cannot be adequately supported within the confines
of a single scientific discipline or traditional funding source."
Marc Sanders was the executive director. Ryerson
contacted him and Sanders admitted to being the author of "Coming to
Understanding."
His identity revealed, Sanders cut off all communication
with those involved in the project.
Ryerson still had questions about how the institute
was funded, how Sanders made his fortune and how much philosophical
training he had. Because his "leads had run dry" and his deadline was
nearing, these questions didn't get answered at the time of publication.
|
