Speaker A
The backstory of the sociology of everyday life is closely tied to the so-called M’Naghten problem. And the M’Naghten problem begins long before William James actually formulates it.
Explores the M’Naghten problem and its impact on sociology, psychology, and legal responsibility through William James' philosophy.
Key Takeaways
- The M’Naghten Rules remain foundational in legal insanity defenses, focusing on the accused’s ability to distinguish right from wrong.
- William James’ ontology of layered realities helps explain how people experience and act within multiple overlapping worlds.
- Sociology of everyday life studies how individuals interpret and act within their perceived realities, which may differ from objective reality.
- Legal and philosophical systems must consider the actor’s subjective reality to fairly assess responsibility and intent.
- The case of Daniel M’Naghten illustrates the complex interplay between mental illness, perception, and legal accountability.
What the video covers
- The video discusses the M’Naghten problem, originating from an 1843 legal case involving Daniel M’Naghten, who suffered from hallucinatory disorders.
- M’Naghten’s case led to the formulation of the M’Naghten Rules, which define legal standards for insanity and responsibility.
- William James’ 1890 work, The Principles of Psychology, especially chapter 21 'The Perception of Reality,' is central to understanding different layers of reality.
- The video explains how individuals may act within different 'finite provinces of meaning' or layers of reality, complicating judgments of responsibility.
- The case highlights the challenge of distinguishing between real and hallucinatory worlds in legal and philosophical contexts.
- Alfred Schütz’s sociological concepts are introduced to explain how people navigate overlapping realities in everyday life.
- The video references literary examples like Don Quixote to illustrate acting within alternate realities and the implications for legal responsibility.
- It emphasizes that actions must be judged within the context of the actor’s perceived reality, not just objective reality.
- The M’Naghten Rules require judges to temporarily accept the accused’s hallucinated reality to assess their culpability.
- The discussion bridges philosophy, sociology, psychology, and law to explore how human action is understood across different realities.
Chapters
- 00:00Introduction to the M’Naghten Problem
- 00:58Daniel M’Naghten’s Hallucinatory Disorders and Actions
- 02:04Legal Trial and the M’Naghten Rules
- 03:24Philosophical and Sociological Implications
- 05:20William James’ Perception of Reality
- 06:21Finite Provinces of Meaning and Don Quixote Example
- 08:21Physical World and Layered Realities
- 09:21Legal Responsibility and Subjective Reality
- 12:06Philosophical Development and Conclusion
Full Transcript — Download SRT & Markdown
Speaker A
It begins about 47 years before the publication of the famous book The Principles of Psychology, the twenty-first chapter of which went down in the history of sociology much more than in the history of psychology. It begins on January 20, 1843, when the
Speaker A
It begins about 47 years before the publication of the famous book The Principles of Psychology, the twenty-first chapter of which went down in the history of sociology much more than in the history of psychology. It begins on January 20, 1843, when the
Speaker A
hallucinatory disorders. It seems to him that the prime minister has personally declared war on him, pushed him to ruin, and is sending spies and assassins after him. And by and large, M’Naghten is acting in self-defense.
Speaker A
British Prime Minister Robert Peel’s secretary, Edward Drummond, leaves his Whitehall residence and, heading toward Charing Cross station, takes a bullet in the back from Daniel M’Naghten, a bankrupt wood-processing business owner from Glasgow, who, as the investigation would establish, suffers from
Speaker A
, M’Naghten does not control his actions. He is not the subject of his own actions. He succeeds in this. The judges take his arguments into account.
Speaker A
hallucinatory disorders. It seems to him that the prime minister has personally declared war on him, pushed him to ruin, and is sending spies and assassins after him. And by and large, M’Naghten is acting in self-defense.
Speaker A
However, London society is stirred up, and the Queen demands that the London College of Judges formulate very clear requirements under which a person can be held responsible for their actions.
Speaker A
He decides to kill Peel before Peel kills him. He makes a mistake, kills Drummond, Peel’s secretary, and stands trial before a London court. His defense is led by a brilliant lawyer of his time, who proves that, being insane,
Speaker A
And we know about them thanks to American courtroom dramas, when we hear the phrase: "He was not capable of distinguishing right from wrong and did not realize the consequences of his actions." This is the second M’Naghten rule. However, there is
Speaker A
M’Naghten does not control his actions. He is not the subject of his own actions. He succeeds in this. The judges take his arguments into account.
Speaker A
actions based on the premise that the circumstances of their hallucination are real and valid. This means that if Daniel M’Naghten decides to kill Edward Drummond in order to send a message to Robert Peel in this way, he should be executed, despite the fact
Speaker A
M’Naghten is sent for compulsory treatment to a psychiatric clinic, where he dies almost 30 years later.
Speaker A
that your wife is having an affair with your neighbor, and you kill the neighbor, then you should be executed, despite your insanity, because even by the standards of that hallucinatory world, you are acting against the law.
Speaker A
However, London society is stirred up, and the Queen demands that the London College of Judges formulate very clear requirements under which a person can be held responsible for their actions.
Speaker A
yet reached this topic—to distinguish the orders of the real, to distinguish, as Alfred Schütz would later write, finite provinces of meaning, to determine which world the person who committed the act was in. Yes, if, for example, Don Quixote attacks windmills
Speaker A
The rules formulated by the London College of Judges receive the name "M’Naghten Rules"—interestingly, named after the killer, not the victim.
Speaker A
giants. And taking this circumstance into account in accordance with the M'Naghten rules, Don Quixote should, of course, have been sent for compulsory treatment. Not because he is not responsible for his actions. A very important point. Where did the lawyer
Speaker A
And we know about them thanks to American courtroom dramas, when we hear the phrase: "He was not capable of distinguishing right from wrong and did not realize the consequences of his actions." This is the second M’Naghten rule. However, there is
Speaker A
text that is a classic of psychological thought, but one chapter in this book is far better known to sociologists than to psychologists: chapter number 21, titled "The Perception of Reality." William James proposes a kind of ontology of the world. He says: "Our
Speaker A
another M’Naghten rule that is less well-known. And yet, it is still used in British legal proceedings. This M’Naghten rule requires judges to assume, for a moment, that everything this person imagined is actually taking place in reality, and to judge their
Speaker A
which you trip over a gate. It is the world in which you are, first and foremost, your body. This is physical existence, and then various other worlds begin to be layered upon it.
Speaker A
actions based on the premise that the circumstances of their hallucination are real and valid. This means that if Daniel M’Naghten decides to kill Edward Drummond in order to send a message to Robert Peel in this way, he should be executed, despite the fact
Speaker A
worlds resembles a Borgesian encyclopedia of animals. It is a very strange accumulation of worlds. It is completely unclear to us how they are connected to one another. To James, I think, this is even less clear.
Speaker A
that he suffers from hallucinatory disorders. If, however, he is deeply convinced that a political hunt is being conducted against him and he is acting in self-defense, then he should be sent for compulsory treatment. Thus, if you are insane and it seems to you
Speaker A
falling pain collisions— everything that is hard to ignore. That is, we must say that all other worlds are, in one way or another, inferior to it. They are deficient; they are derivatives of the physical world, yes.
Speaker A
that your wife is having an affair with your neighbor, and you kill the neighbor, then you should be executed, despite your insanity, because even by the standards of that hallucinatory world, you are acting against the law.
Speaker A
a normal person. This means that, in general, most of the same rules that operate in the world of everyday life operate there as well. Only in that world, the one where Daniel McNaughton resides, the circumstances of time and
Speaker A
This curious story regarding the M’Naghten rules becomes a source of significant philosophical work, which, by and large, must create a language for describing human action within one layer of reality or another. It requires the philosopher, primarily the philosopher—as sociologists had not
Speaker A
hallucinations. From this problem set by James, you can see something remotely resembling the plot of the film "Inception," where worlds overlap, and a philosopher is obliged to answer the question: to which stratum of reality, or, as James calls it,
Speaker A
yet reached this topic—to distinguish the orders of the real, to distinguish, as Alfred Schütz would later write, finite provinces of meaning, to determine which world the person who committed the act was in. Yes, if, for example, Don Quixote attacks windmills
Speaker A
as we cannot say with certainty which stratum of reality the actor is in at that moment. It is this so-called Jamesian problem that becomes central to phenomenological sociology, and as a part of it, the sociology of everyday life, the project of Alfred Schütz,
Speaker A
and destroys them while actually fighting giants, judges must take into account that Don Quixote destroyed property not because he decided to spite his neighbor and ruin his windmill, but because, possessed by the spirit of chivalry, he rushed to fight
Speaker A
it is precisely in this world that Husserlian predicates of reality, predicates of existence, coincide." It is in this world that we cannot doubt, as long as we are in our right minds, the reality of the things surrounding us, and so on, and so forth. And most
Speaker A
giants. And taking this circumstance into account in accordance with the M’Naghten rules, Don Quixote should, of course, have been sent for compulsory treatment. Not because he is not responsible for his actions. A very important point. Where did the lawyer
Speaker A
unreflective action, if we understand " meaning" in the way the classics of our discipline, like Weber, understood it.
Speaker A
miscalculate? Not because he is not a subject. He is a subject, but he is acting in a world other than the one where he causes damage. In 1890, this problem receives philosophical development thanks to William James's text, The Principles of Psychology. A
Speaker A
shift into the world of imagination and start thinking about what I should do in a while, at that moment we begin to imbue our actions with meaning. It turns out that in the everyday world there is still no particular meaning,
Speaker A
text that is a classic of psychological thought, but one chapter in this book is far better known to sociologists than to psychologists: chapter number 21, titled "The Perception of Reality." William James proposes a kind of ontology of the world. He says: "Our
Speaker A
hamburger. He takes the idea of a continuum of worlds from Henri Bergson. The lowest, yes, the largest layer of the pyramid is, of course, this very Supreme Reality of James. And at the top of the pyramid are dreams. Dreams
Speaker A
world is a plurality of realities." "They are layered upon one another." There is a paramount reality. It is the world of physical objects and sensations. It is the world in which things push back. It is the world in
Speaker A
Thus, Schutz says, each world has a certain cognitive style. This is what we can and cannot doubt. It is how time flows there, it is how we exist there with other people, the form of experiencing togetherness inherent to
Speaker A
which you trip over a gate. It is the world in which you are, first and foremost, your body. This is physical existence, and then various other worlds begin to be layered upon it.
Speaker A
That is why in the everyday world things can push back. In the world of fantasy, I can do whatever I want with things. So, by describing the elements of cognitive styles, he says, it allows us to distinguish how exactly the
Speaker A
Including, he says, for example, the world of hallucinations, the world of mental illness, the world of dreams, the world of idols of the tribe—collective delusions inherent to people of your class and background. In general, James’s classification of
Speaker A
intersubjectivity of communication. We can, of course, communicate with our imaginary friends, but you understand that imaginary friends, while being partners in communication according to Schutz, do not strike back. They lack genuine agency, and accordingly, our coexistence with them is not social in
Speaker A
worlds resembles a Borgesian encyclopedia of animals. It is a very strange accumulation of worlds. It is completely unclear to us how they are connected to one another. To James, I think, this is even less clear.
Speaker A
everyday, non-reflective world. I will emphasize, this is the starting point of this philosophical sociology of everyday life, which moves to the American continent with Alfred Schutz and encounters the empirical sociology of everyday life at the Chicago School.
Topics:M’Naghten RulesWilliam Jamessociology of everyday lifelegal insanity defensehallucinatory disordersphilosophy of realityAlfred Schützphenomenological sociologyperception of realityDaniel M’Naghten
