Discussions With A Transgender Philosophy + Psychology Major
Philosophy is often seen as a pursuit of truth: an endless questioning of existence, meaning, and purpose. But what happens when those philosophical inquiries intertwine with personal identity whilst shaping the way someone sees the world and their place within it? In this interview, I had the privilege of speaking with TWS, a transgender, neurodivergent philosophy student whose journey through life, academia, and self-discovery offers a unique and deeply insightful perspective.
The interview, though short, is posted below:
A.S:
Q) You’ve studied both philosophy and psychology. Do you see philosophy as more of an academic pursuit, or do you consider it a tool for living?
TWS:
A) Oh, it’s certainly both, at least for me. I do want to become a professor of philosophy, sharing my love and passion for the field with students. If I get to write some interesting papers and books along the way, then that’s great, too! But philosophy is also a very powerful tool for living well. That dimension has been a guiding thread throughout all of my philosophical studies, and I hold onto many philosophical notions—William James’ will to believe and meliorism, Nietzsche’s life affirmation and the Dionysian, Aristotle’s golden mean, Sartre’s bad faith, and more—to reflect upon and guide my conduct and engagements with life. In my darkest moments, philosophy has helped me keep going and dig myself out.
Q) William James spoke of truth as something that is “made” rather than “found.” How do you interpret this idea in your own life?
A) Well, I find that it's practical application in my own life finds its best expression in his essays "The Will to Believe" and "Is Life Worth Living?" In the former, he lays out his famous notion of the titular will to believe, whereas the latter is largely an application of it to existential matters. That idea of his has direct relevance to his pragmatist inclinations. The will to believe is effectively about meeting truth half way. It directly connects to his notions of truth being made and not found, and emphasizes humanistic elements of acting to realize truth in the world.
Whether it is courting another person's affections, leaping across a chasm in the mountains, or the question of life's worth--all examples James gives--what we believe will help decide the outcome. If we believe another person likes us, we are more likely to act in a warm, friendly, and open way that will help create that affection in them, just as, if we believe they dislike us, we may become cold and standoffish, establishing a distance that will create the truth of the dislike. If we are stuck in the mountains, and our only way out is by leaping across a chasm, doubt will create the hesitation that sends up rolling into the abyss; however, if we believe that we can make the leap successfully, then we are more likely to succeed in fact. And, existentially, James writes: "Be not afraid of life. Believe that life is worth living, and your belief will help create the fact." If we affirm life's worth--if we say Yes to life, to borrow Nietzschean parlance--that creates in us a subtle disposition to take care of ourselves, to spend time with friends and family, to pursue our goals, and more that will make life, in fact, worth living, just as believing life to be a damned affair creates the fact by inclining us to isolate from others and sulk in a dark room, resigning ourselves to our lot. It's not some metaphysical or theological doctrine (though it certainly can be used that way, including by James himself), but a simple, yet powerful, observation about how expectations guide conduct.
I hold onto that idea to help guide my actions and beliefs. The will to believe inspires me to seize opportunities and pursue my goals. Can I make it as a professor? Believe that I can, and my belief will help create the fact. Will I be able to be a proper woman? Believe it, and it shall be. Can I forge a happy relationship with this person? If I believe I can, then the odds are in my favor. And so on. The will to believe has direct applications to personal issues, existential questions, queerness and neurodiversity, political praxis, and more. It all still requires work--these ideas go well with James meliorism, the idea that improvement is neither guaranteed nor doomed but always possible, and becomes more likely the more we act to realize it--and willing to believe is much easier said than done. Yet it is worth the attempt, and, besides, there is much virtue in the word try. In any case, I try to create truth for myself every day to live the most meaningful, flourishing life I can.
Q) If philosophy is traditionally built on neurotypical ways of thinking, what are some ways we might rethink philosophy from a neurodivergent perspective?
A) Well, it's hard to say for certain, considering all the different kinds of neurodivergence. What a rethinking of philosophy for/by autistics vs dyslexics vs ADHDers, and so on, looks like could differ. But, ultimately, it'd center, I'd say, on the expansion of possibilities. Including more people and more perspectives in the philosophical project will inevitably create new possibilities for thought, especially considering some of the particular creativities that many neurodivergents are known for. There would also likely be a loosening or expansion of what we consider reasonable, natural, healthy, etc. in philosophy, as well as intersections with queer philosophy and the philosophy of madness. It could also entail somewhat a shift away from the Academy towards other, more public spaces, especially online. Philosophy may also be reoriented towards a more collaborative framework, rather than being fueled by singular geniuses. The details of my answer are vague, I know, but necessarily so, seeing as the neurodiversity paradigm demands no decrees from on high but, rather, encourages messy inquiry by many people from different backgrounds and ways of thinking.
Q)If you were to develop your own unique contribution to philosophy, what would its central question be?
A) Well, I'm not sure what the central question would be—I tend to philosophize less by pursuing questions and more by flashes of intuition and sparkling inspiration—but I do have a sort of primary contribution in mind already, viz. my theory of meaning and meaningfulness. There's a lot of details and moving parts, and I am deliberately keeping my cards close to my chest... However, at its core, it revolves around a distinction between meaningfulness as a mooded, affective experience rooted in our activities and projects and meaning as a narrative, interpretive phenomenon that structures those activities and projects.
Q) Can you explain your central concept of viz in layman's terms?
Q)And finally, what’s one question you wish people asked you more often?
I really appreciate you taking the time to be in the interview, it was great talking with you. So yeah, I sincerely hope you have great success in your studies and career. Thanks so much!
Hope this was an interesting read, definitely not a perspective you can have access to day by day. Hopefully that increases in the future, (the diversity, not the singular perspective itself), and we can see more acceptance for neurodivergent and transgender individuals, as well as appreciation for the humanities as a whole. Value is a matter of infinite hope and finite potential; the importance lies in its vector.
Stay safe.
Q) What was the moment, if there was one, when you first realized that transitioning was something you needed?
A) I’m not sure there was any singular moment, any radical shift. It was more like a building pressure, a gradual process of acceptance. I’d had an inkling that I might be trans since at least middle school, but the mind is very good at rationalizing and denying. I wouldn’t say I ever repressed it, per se, but I definitely avoided the issue for a long time. In 11th grade, I tried fleeing into masculinity—especially since I unreasonably feared nobody could love a trans person—but that didn’t work; the feelings never went away, no matter how hard I tried to be male. And for a long time, I wavered thinking I was merely genderfluid and could manage being a “guy” for life. But, over time, I reflected more on my experience, and decided to slowly started socially transition, starting with my partner at the time, who was amazingly supportive and encouraging. In that environment, with their support, I was able to, over time, come out to my family and friends, and even start hormones, which I’ve been on for a little over a year. Mustering the courage for all that wasn’t easy, let me tell you! It really does take a sort of leap of faith, a will to believe. I’ve still got a ways to go in my journey—voice training, coming out at work, maybe surgery, and more—but I am very happy with my progress so far and eager to keep going. Now that I know this happiness and fullness, there’s no going back!
Q) What do you think people misunderstand most about trans identity from a psychological/mental perspective?
A) Hmmm... I think I'd maybe say transness's relationship with madness/mental illness. All too often people pathologize transness; trans medicalism is a real problem. They assume that trans people must be insane or otherwise mentally ill. But, quite simply, they're not--at least not qua trans. Transness is a phenomenological category, a variety of human experience, and just as, if not more, central to it than gender dysphoria is gender euphoria: this sense of deep meaningfulness over being one's authentic self in the realm of gender.Q) What do you think people misunderstand most about trans identity from a psychological/mental perspective?
Q) If philosophy is traditionally built on neurotypical ways of thinking, what are some ways we might rethink philosophy from a neurodivergent perspective?
A) Well, it's hard to say for certain, considering all the different kinds of neurodivergence. What a rethinking of philosophy for/by autistics vs dyslexics vs ADHDers, and so on, looks like could differ. But, ultimately, it'd center, I'd say, on the expansion of possibilities. Including more people and more perspectives in the philosophical project will inevitably create new possibilities for thought, especially considering some of the particular creativities that many neurodivergents are known for. There would also likely be a loosening or expansion of what we consider reasonable, natural, healthy, etc. in philosophy, as well as intersections with queer philosophy and the philosophy of madness. It could also entail somewhat a shift away from the Academy towards other, more public spaces, especially online. Philosophy may also be reoriented towards a more collaborative framework, rather than being fueled by singular geniuses. The details of my answer are vague, I know, but necessarily so, seeing as the neurodiversity paradigm demands no decrees from on high but, rather, encourages messy inquiry by many people from different backgrounds and ways of thinking.
Q)If you were to develop your own unique contribution to philosophy, what would its central question be?
A) Well, I'm not sure what the central question would be—I tend to philosophize less by pursuing questions and more by flashes of intuition and sparkling inspiration—but I do have a sort of primary contribution in mind already, viz. my theory of meaning and meaningfulness. There's a lot of details and moving parts, and I am deliberately keeping my cards close to my chest... However, at its core, it revolves around a distinction between meaningfulness as a mooded, affective experience rooted in our activities and projects and meaning as a narrative, interpretive phenomenon that structures those activities and projects.
Q) Can you explain your central concept of viz in layman's terms?
A) As I said, in basic summary, the central concept is a distinction between meaningfulness as an affective, mooded experience rooted in our activities and projects and meaning as a narrative, interpretive structuring of those activities. We come across meaningfulness, rather than creating it, by living well, whereas meaning is the story we tell about ourselves, the world, and our role in it. There's a lot more to it, of course--including gender and religious experiences--but I'm saving a lot of those details for my dissertation, which I would like to have focus on this project.
Q)And finally, what’s one question you wish people asked you more often?
A) What do you want out of this life and why? I think it's a powerful question well worth asking for anyone. The pause of reflection it spurs on... There's a lot of potential in that pause. And not enough people think about such things. Of course, I have my answers—becoming a professor, successfully transitioning, having several close friends, publishing some books, learning skills like longsword fencing, piano, and German, etc.—and I have my general whys. But to be probed about it, to have to think more deeply about it all—there's something to that.
Hope this was an interesting read, definitely not a perspective you can have access to day by day. Hopefully that increases in the future, (the diversity, not the singular perspective itself), and we can see more acceptance for neurodivergent and transgender individuals, as well as appreciation for the humanities as a whole. Value is a matter of infinite hope and finite potential; the importance lies in its vector.
Stay safe.