In Praise of Wonder

In the New York Times article In Praise of Wonder, Simon argues that we should wonder. In particular, he argues that we should “put wonder at the centre of our personal and political lives,” and that “[w]e require this … on every day of the year.” In this post, I summarise his argument into its constituent premises (Ps) and conclusion (C).

Simon proposes that wonder is necessary to live a real life (P1). In particular, “a deficit of it will ensure that one has never really lived.” In other words, if a person has “really lived,” then he must have had wondered; and if a person has not wondered, then he “has never really lived.”

Simon also proposes that wonder is sufficient to counteract hatred (P2). In particular, it is “the antidote to hatred.” For example, if Herod had wondered, then the massacre of the innocents would not have commenced; and “[i]f we had wonder at the individual universe that is each fellow human, at the cosmic complexity of other people,” then we would not have “put refugees in cages.”

In addition to P1 and P2, Simon also proposes the following: if an act (e.g., to wonder) is either necessary or sufficient for an outcome (e.g., to live a real life), and we desire the outcome, then we should perform the act (P3); we desire to live a real life (P4); and we desire to to counteract hatred (P5).

Given the aforementioned premises (i.e., P1-P5), Simon concludes that we should wonder (C).