Chiechele Professor of Social and Political Theory, Gerald (Jerry) Cohen

Chiechele Professor of Social and Political Theory, Gerald (Jerry) Cohen, gave a fascinating interview for the Oxford Chabad Society newsletter at his office in All Souls College. Professor Jerry Cohen is a student and successor of Sir Isaiah Berlin and a kind of person many philosophy students would like to meet.

After speaking to Jerry for an hour one realizes that although he is a rigorous thinker and has a great philosophical mind he also has a great sense of humour. One also becomes aware that besides his professional occupation as an analytical philosopher he has a healthy Jewish side that when tapped into comes to life. Trying to find out who intrigues Jerry most we asked him which character in history he would like to meet, if he had the choice. Without hesitation he says that he would like to meet Karl Marx, whom Jerry calls “a wonderful human being, but not a sweetie pie”. Jerry has worked many years on Marx’s thought and would sincerely like to know his opinion about certain ambiguities that have raged in secondary literature in the past 150 years. But on second thought Jerry says that he would far more enjoy being stuck on a desert island with Engel for “he was much less profound but much nicer”.

Jerry has a lot of admiration for his teacher Sir Isaiah Berlin, but did mind explaining why many philosophers dismiss his work. “In their opinion” Jerry says, “Sir Isaiah didn’t meet the standards of precision and rigor of argument characteristic of analytical philosophy.” Jerry, however, disagrees. One famous idea of Sir Isaiah is his essay, “two concepts of freedom”, where he profoundly distinguishes between freedom as no interference by anybody else, and freedom meaning some sort of perfection of the personality. Jerry believes that this, amongst some of his other works, were fantastically important influential ideas.

Jerry is a person of change. It is a known fact that Jerry has changed from the time he wrote his book in 1978, “Karl Marx’s theory of history: a defense”. He speaks openly about his coming to the realization that Marxism radically underestimates the importance to people of religious and other national identifications. Where Marxism just sees the human being as all about creativity, production, releasing your energies and powers, it leaves out a whole side of humanity, which is about who the person is. “So”, he says, “I am strongly reconsidering Marx’s theory of history.”

Another major aspect of change in Jerry’s life is his attitude towards Jewish tradition. As a child brought up in a Jewish communist home, he practiced a secular version of Judaism. His family observed the holidays in their own unique way and his Bar Mitzvah consisted of reading out a little Yiddish story. He acknowledges that he does not, even now, necessarily regret not having a proper bar mitzvah (though he knows that it’s never too late). But he makes it very clear that over the years his attitude towards Bar Mitzvah and living a Jewish life style has changed. He says, “I have changed my mind very strongly about that. I now believe very strongly in the affirmation of tradition.” Although Jerry speaks English with a Canadian accent he says that he “loves speaking Yiddish”. He naturally throws in Yiddish clichés “Azoy geit es (this is how it is)”; “Es iz shver tzu zein a yid” (it’s hard to be a Jew), and enjoys a good Jewish joke, which he is not short of. Interestingly, he identifies Judaism more with Yiddish and Hebrew of the Bible than with the Hebrew of the secular state.

When Jerry speaks about belief, he says that he is much more respectful of the religious frame of mind than most non-believers and intellectuals are. He understands the source of conviction, but he differentiates between emotional and intellectual belief. He says, “if you claim to have had a mystical experience in which you felt close to G‑d, it doesn’t have to be feelings, it could be quite a matter of the thinking mind but nevertheless not according to the current standards of rationality.”

A subject that was of great interest was his opinion about Israel. Jerry said that he didn’t sign the circular saying that Israelis should be banned and didn’t sign the circular attacking the circular that says that Israelis should be banned. He explains that even if it is considered right to ban Israeli academics for whatever reason, unless you can be convinced it will be positive, you should not do it and he says, “on the whole it can be a negative thing.”