All Thinkers

Mary Midgley

Mary Midgley was a British moral philosopher. She is one of the most original ethical thinkers of the 20th century. She is best known for her work on animals, evolution, science, and what makes humans morally serious. She wrote in plain language for general readers as well as academic ones. She was born in 1919 in London. She died in 2018, aged 99. She was active and writing books well into her 90s. She studied classics and philosophy at Oxford from 1938. She belonged to a remarkable generation of women philosophers there, including Iris Murdoch, Elizabeth Anscombe, and Philippa Foot. They all attended Oxford during the Second World War, when many male students had been called away. The reduced male presence created an unusual opportunity. Together these four women, sometimes called the Oxford Quartet, would later help reshape Anglo-American moral philosophy. After Oxford, Midgley married the philosopher Geoffrey Midgley in 1950. They moved to Newcastle in northern England, where Geoffrey took a teaching post. Mary raised three sons. She did not publish her first book until she was 59. Beast and Man came out in 1978. The book was a major statement on the relationship between human beings and other animals. It launched her late and remarkable writing career. From 1978 until her death 40 years later, she wrote book after book. She criticised what she saw as scientific over-reach by figures like Richard Dawkins. She wrote about ethics, religion, evolution, and the role of myth in scientific thinking. She became known as a sharp, clear, plain-spoken critic of bad ideas. She finished her last book just months before her death at 99.

Origin
United Kingdom
Lifespan
1919 - 2018
Era
Modern / 20th-21st Century
Subjects
Moral Philosophy Philosophy Of Science Animal Ethics 20th Century British Philosophy
Skills
Ethical Thinking Critical Thinking Scientific Thinking Creative Expression Research Skills
Why They Matter

Mary Midgley matters for three reasons. First, she helped open serious philosophical attention to animals. Her 1978 book Beast and Man argued that human beings are part of the animal world, not separate from it. We share emotions, social bonds, and basic moral instincts with other animals. The view was unfashionable when she wrote it. Most Western philosophy had treated humans as a separate category. Midgley pushed back, drawing on real research about animal behaviour. Modern animal ethics owes much to her foundational work.

Second, she was a major critic of what she called 'scientism'. Scientism is the idea that science can answer all serious questions, including moral and philosophical ones. She did not oppose science. She thought science was wonderful. She opposed the idea that science by itself could replace philosophy or ethics. She wrote sharp critiques of writers like Richard Dawkins, E.O. Wilson, and others who she thought were over-reaching. The debate is still alive. Many people on both sides cite her arguments.

Third, she showed that important philosophy could be written in plain language for ordinary readers. Most academic philosophy is written for other academics, in technical language. Midgley wrote for anyone willing to think carefully. She was clear without being shallow. She was funny without being unserious. Her style was a deliberate choice. She thought the most important philosophical questions belonged to everyone, not just to specialists. Her example has inspired many later philosophers to write more accessibly.

Key Ideas
1
Humans Are Animals Too
2
What Is Scientism?
3
She Started Late
Key Quotations
"Philosophy is like plumbing. It is something nobody notices until it goes wrong."
— Mary Midgley, repeatedly used in lectures and writings
This is one of Mary Midgley's most loved sayings. It captures her view of what philosophy actually is. Most of the time, our basic concepts and ways of thinking work without us paying any attention. They are hidden in the walls of our mind, like the plumbing in a house. We use them every day without noticing. Then something goes wrong. An old idea stops working. A debate gets stuck. An action seems wrong but we cannot say why. Philosophy, Midgley said, is the careful work of digging into the hidden systems and fixing what is broken. The image is funny but serious. It tells students that philosophy is not abstract speculation about clouds. It is practical repair work. Anyone might need to do it at some point. For students, this is one of the most useful images of philosophy ever made. It puts the field in everyday terms anyone can understand.
"Living things are not really like machines, but machines are a bit like living things."
— Mary Midgley, Science as Salvation (1992) and other works
Mary Midgley often used clear, witty contrasts. This one captures her view of how to think about life and machines. For centuries, Western thinkers compared living things to machines. Animals were said to be like clocks, or pumps, or computers. Midgley thought this got it backwards. Living things came first. They are full of complexity, surprise, growth, and adaptation. Machines are simpler. Machines copy a few features of living things, but they do not capture life. Comparing animals to machines tells us less than comparing machines to animals would. The reversed comparison is helpful. Machines are useful tools. They are not the deep model of how the world works. Life is the deep model. Machines are partial imitations. For students, the line is useful for thinking about modern technology. Computers and robots can do amazing things. They are not, despite popular language, just like living minds. Living minds came first. Machines are pale imitations.
Using This Thinker in the Classroom
Critical Thinking When introducing students to what philosophy is
How to introduce
Read with students Mary Midgley's image of philosophy as plumbing. Most of the time, our basic concepts work without us noticing. We do not need to think about them. Sometimes they break, and we have to dig in and fix the leak. Discuss with students examples from their own lives. Have they ever been confused about a moral question? Have they ever found that a basic assumption stopped working in a new situation? These are moments when philosophical work is needed. Midgley's image is friendly. Philosophy is not abstract or scary. It is practical repair work. Anyone might need it. The image makes the field accessible to students who might otherwise feel philosophy was not for them.
Ethical Thinking When teaching students about how we should treat animals
How to introduce
Tell students about Mary Midgley's argument that humans are part of the animal world, not separate from it. We share emotions, social bonds, and basic moral feelings with other animals. Animals have minds. They feel pain. They form attachments. Discuss with students how this should affect how we treat them. Midgley did not give one specific answer about meat-eating, zoos, or laboratory testing. She thought the questions were complicated. But she insisted that animal lives matter. Discuss with students how this connects to their own choices about food, pets, and how they think about the natural world. The conversation can be rich. Midgley's basic insight, that animals are moral beings rather than objects, has shaped modern animal welfare law and ethical thinking.
Scientific Thinking When teaching students about the difference between science and scientism
How to introduce
Discuss with students the difference between loving science and believing science can answer everything. Mary Midgley made this distinction clear. Science is wonderful at answering questions about how the physical world works. It is less helpful with questions like how to live, what is just, and what life means. These are real questions but they are not scientific questions. Discuss with students which kinds of questions science can answer and which it cannot. The conversation helps students see what kind of work each different field of inquiry does. Midgley's distinction is useful for life. You can take science seriously without thinking it solves all problems. Many other forms of human inquiry, including philosophy, history, and art, do real work that science cannot do.
Further Reading

For a first introduction, Mary Midgley's The Owl of Minerva (2005), her autobiography, is a wonderful starting point. It is funny, clear, and gives a sense of her personality and ideas at the same time. Her short book Wickedness (1984) is a sharp introduction to her style. Many of her lectures are available on YouTube. The 2014 documentary The Owl of Minerva has not been widely released but covers her life.

Key Ideas
1
Against Richard Dawkins
2
Why Animals Matter
3
Plumbing for Bad Ideas
Key Quotations
"Our moral life is not separate from our biological life. It is part of it."
— Paraphrased from Mary Midgley, Beast and Man (1978)
Mary Midgley argued that our moral feelings, like care for children, loyalty to friends, and concern for justice, did not appear from nowhere. They have deep biological roots. Many other animals show similar feelings. We share basic moral instincts with apes, dogs, and many other species. Our moral life is the development of these animal capacities, not the rejection of them. The view was unfashionable when she wrote it. Many philosophers had insisted that human morality was utterly distinct from animal behaviour. Midgley thought this denied something obvious. We did not invent love or loyalty from nothing. They are inheritances from our animal past. The view does not reduce morality to biology. It just acknowledges where our capacities come from. For students, the line is useful for connecting biology, philosophy, and everyday life. The instinct to protect a child is moral and biological at the same time. Pretending otherwise is a mistake.
"There are different ways of looking at things. Each way has its uses. None of them is the whole story."
— Paraphrased from Mary Midgley's various writings on pluralism
Mary Midgley believed in what philosophers call pluralism. Different ways of thinking about the world do different jobs. Science describes how things work physically. Religion connects us to deep questions about meaning. Art shows us how lives feel from inside. Ethics asks how we should act. None of these activities is the whole story by itself. None of them can replace the others. Midgley thought scientists who claimed science could explain everything were as wrong as religious people who claimed religion could explain everything. We need many different kinds of thinking, each doing what it does best, working together. The view is wise and difficult to live by. We are often tempted to pick one frame and dismiss the others. Midgley pushed back. For students, this is useful. The world is too complicated for any single approach. Curiosity, honesty, and humility are needed when the questions are hard. No one tradition has all the answers.
Using This Thinker in the Classroom
Critical Thinking When teaching students about reading metaphors carefully
How to introduce
Tell students about Midgley's critique of Richard Dawkins's 'selfish gene' metaphor. Dawkins used the word 'selfish' to describe genes. The metaphor was striking. It shaped how readers thought about evolution and human behaviour. Midgley argued it was misleading. Genes are not selfish or unselfish. They are bits of DNA. Reading human moral terms back into them confused biology with ethics. Discuss with students how metaphors can be both useful and dangerous. They make complicated ideas vivid. They also smuggle in extra meanings the original idea did not have. Reading carefully means noticing the metaphors, not just the explicit claims. Midgley's careful reading of Dawkins is a useful model for any kind of careful reading.
Creative Expression When teaching students about writing for general readers
How to introduce
Tell students that Mary Midgley wrote serious philosophy in plain language. Most academic philosophy is written for other academics in technical jargon. Midgley wrote for anyone willing to think carefully. She was clear without being shallow. She was funny without being unserious. The choice was deliberate. She thought important questions belonged to everyone, not just specialists. Discuss with students what makes writing accessible without dumbing down. Short sentences. Concrete examples. Familiar metaphors. Direct prose. Midgley used all of these. Her example is a useful model for students who want to write about complex ideas for general audiences. The skill is harder than it looks. Plain writing about deep ideas is one of the most demanding forms of writing.
Further Reading

For deeper reading, Beast and Man (1978, revised 1995) is her foundational work on humans and other animals. Heart and Mind (1981) develops her ethical pluralism. Science as Salvation (1992) is her major critique of scientism. The collection Utopias, Dolphins and Computers (1996) gathers shorter essays. Clare Mac Cumhaill and Rachael Wiseman's Metaphysical Animals (2022) tells the story of the Oxford Quartet (Anscombe, Foot, Midgley, Murdoch) together.

Key Ideas
1
The Oxford Quartet
2
The Myths of Science
3
Why She Was Sometimes Underestimated
Key Quotations
"I have spent my life arguing with assertions that I think are wrong."
— Mary Midgley, late interview, c. 2010s
Mary Midgley said this in a late interview about her career. The line is honest. She did spend much of her career attacking other people's bad ideas. She criticised Richard Dawkins, E.O. Wilson, James Lovelock, and many others. She argued against scientism, against reductive materialism, against various forms of evolutionary moralising. The work of disagreement is sometimes seen as negative. Midgley thought it was important. Bad ideas, especially when they are popular, can do real harm. Someone has to argue against them carefully. She was that someone for many decades. Her career was largely defined by patient, sharp critique. She was not just contrarian. She had her own positive views. But the public side of her work was often the work of attacking ideas she thought were wrong. For advanced students, the line raises a useful question about intellectual work. How much should we focus on building positive views, and how much on tearing down bad ones? Different thinkers answer differently. Midgley spent more energy on the second than many.
"We don't have to choose between these. Both are valuable. Both have their place."
— Reported as a frequent Midgley refrain in lectures and discussions
Friends, students, and colleagues often reported Mary Midgley saying versions of this. When someone presented an either-or choice (science or religion, reason or emotion, individual or community, mind or body), she often pushed back. The choice was usually false. Both sides were valuable. The work was to figure out how they fit together, not to pick one and discard the other. The pattern reflected her wider pluralism. She thought human life needed many different kinds of thinking, many different perspectives, many different traditions. Forcing a single answer onto questions that have multiple valid sides was usually a mistake. The view is harder than it sounds. We are often tempted to pick a side. Midgley resisted that temptation patiently for decades. For advanced students, this approach is worth modelling. Many real-world disputes turn on assuming a choice has to be made between two extremes. Midgley's pluralism opens space for richer answers.
Using This Thinker in the Classroom
Critical Thinking When teaching students about how science depends on background pictures
How to introduce
Discuss with advanced students Midgley's argument that science runs on myths. Not the kind of myths in story books. The kind of large background pictures that shape how scientists frame their work. The 'machine' picture of nature. The 'selfish' picture of evolution. The 'survival of the fittest' picture of life. These pictures are not exact statements of scientific findings. They are imaginative frames. Discuss with students examples of how this works. Atoms 'orbit' nuclei. Genes 'try' to replicate. Computers 'think'. None of these is literally true. The metaphors are useful but also limiting. Midgley thought recognising the role of background pictures helps us use science more wisely. Science is not just data. Like all human activity, it works within imaginative frames that come from culture, history, and choice.
Critical Thinking When teaching students about late careers in intellectual work
How to introduce
Tell advanced students that Mary Midgley did not publish her first book until she was 59. She lived to 99. She published 18 books in 40 years. Her late career was extraordinarily productive. Discuss with students what this might mean. Many writers and thinkers do their best work young. The Fields Medal in mathematics has an age limit of 40. The popular image of the genius is often someone who blazes early. Midgley's career was different. She built on decades of reading, conversation, and life experience. Her books were patient and considered. Her style was confident in a way that often takes time to develop. The case is encouraging. Not every intellectual career has to start young. Some of the best work comes later, after life has been lived.
Common Misconceptions
Common misconception

Mary Midgley was anti-science.

→
What to teach instead

She was not. She admired science greatly. She thought scientific knowledge was one of the great achievements of humanity. She criticised scientism, the belief that science can answer all serious questions, including moral ones. The two positions are different. You can love science and still think it cannot answer questions about how to live, what is just, or what life means. Midgley argued for this distinction throughout her career. Critics sometimes called her anti-science when she criticised famous scientists like Richard Dawkins. Reading her actually shows the opposite. She thought science was wonderful but limited. So is every other field of human inquiry. The complaint that she was anti-science usually came from people who could not separate the science itself from the philosophical claims some scientists made on its behalf.

Common misconception

She was a religious philosopher.

→
What to teach instead

She had complicated relationships with religion. She took religion seriously as a human phenomenon and thought religious traditions had important insights to offer. She criticised militantly atheist philosophers like Richard Dawkins for what she saw as their crude dismissal of religion. But she did not herself argue for any specific religious belief. She wrote about religion as one of many ways human beings have approached deep questions. Her own positive philosophical views were not religious in any conventional sense. Treating her as a religious thinker overstates her commitments. Treating her as a religious critic overstates her hostility. The careful reading sees her as taking religion seriously as one important human activity among others.

Common misconception

She was just a critic of other people's ideas.

→
What to teach instead

Her public reputation was often built on her sharp criticism of figures like Richard Dawkins and E.O. Wilson. But she had substantial positive philosophical views of her own. Beast and Man (1978) developed a careful account of human nature as continuous with the rest of the animal world. Heart and Mind (1981) developed her ethical pluralism. Wickedness (1984) examined moral evil with care and depth. Science as Salvation (1992) developed her account of scientific myths. Her criticism was always grounded in positive views about how to think well. Reducing her to a critic underestimates the constructive side of her work. She built as well as broke down.

Common misconception

Plain language means easy ideas.

→
What to teach instead

Midgley's writing is plain. Her ideas are not easy. She used clear language to discuss difficult questions: the relationship between humans and other animals, the limits of science, the nature of moral knowledge, the role of metaphor in scientific thinking. The plainness of style hides serious philosophical content. Anyone who reads her carefully realises that simple sentences can carry deep claims. The combination is a skill. Many academic philosophers write difficult prose about straightforward ideas. Midgley wrote straightforward prose about difficult ideas. The second skill is rarer and more valuable. Students should not assume her plain style means her work is shallow. The clarity is what makes the depth accessible.

Intellectual Connections
Complements
Iris Murdoch
Murdoch and Midgley were friends from their student days at Oxford during World War II. Both belonged to the so-called Oxford Quartet of women philosophers. Both pushed back against the dominant analytical and emotivist philosophies of their time. Both insisted that moral philosophy should engage with real human life. They worked in different ways: Murdoch through novels and Platonic ethics, Midgley through plain-language critique of bad science and bad metaphysics. Reading them together gives students a sense of how a small group of women philosophers helped reshape Anglo-American moral philosophy together. Their friendship was real. Their intellectual support was real. The change they made together was substantial.
Complements
G.E.M. Anscombe
Anscombe was another member of the Oxford Quartet. Like Midgley, she pushed back against mid-century English-speaking moral philosophy. Like Midgley, she drew on Aristotle and the older ethical tradition. Their styles were different. Anscombe was more technical, more Catholic, more austere. Midgley was more accessible, more pluralist, more sceptical of religion. Both helped reopen serious moral philosophy. Reading them together gives students a sense of how the Oxford Quartet's work was complementary rather than identical. Each woman brought her own emphasis. Together they covered an unusually wide range of ground.
In Dialogue With
Peter Singer
Singer, the contemporary philosopher of animal rights, has worked in territory Midgley helped open. His 1975 book Animal Liberation came out shortly before Midgley's Beast and Man. The two books approached the question of animal moral status from different angles. Singer argued more from within utilitarian ethics. Midgley argued from a wider view of human and animal continuity. They reached overlapping practical conclusions but disagreed on theoretical foundations. Reading them together gives students a sense of how serious thinking about animal ethics can take different paths. Both are essential reading for the field.
In Dialogue With
Charles Darwin
Darwin's theory of evolution provided much of the scientific foundation for Midgley's view of humans as part of the animal world. She drew on Darwin throughout her work. She also pushed back against later versions of evolutionary thinking that she considered crude or moralistic. The 'selfish gene' picture of evolution, she thought, distorted Darwin's actual insights. Reading them together gives students a sense of how a major scientific theory can be developed in different ways by different later thinkers. Midgley defended what she saw as Darwin's careful original view against what she saw as the over-simplifications of his successors.
Complements
Rachel Carson
Carson, the great American biologist and environmental writer, did similar work to Midgley in a different field. Both wrote serious science for general readers. Both insisted that humans are part of the natural world and have responsibilities towards it. Both faced criticism from professional scientists who thought their work was too accessible to be serious. Both were eventually recognised as foundational figures in their fields. Reading them together gives students a sense of how women writers in the second half of the 20th century helped change how the wider world thought about human relationships with nature.
Complements
Lynn Margulis
Margulis, the great American biologist, did important work on the cooperative origins of complex life. Cells, she argued, evolved through cooperation between simpler organisms, not just through the competition Darwin emphasised. Midgley admired Margulis's work and used it in her critique of overly competitive views of evolution. Both thinkers pushed back against a popular picture of nature as ruthless competition. Both insisted that cooperation, care, and mutual benefit are also central to how life works. Reading them together gives students a richer picture of biology than the standard 'survival of the fittest' image suggests.
Further Reading

For research-level engagement, the special issue of the Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement on Midgley (2018) collects scholarly assessments. Greg McElwain's Mary Midgley: An Introduction (2020) provides a careful overview. Liz McKinnell's work on Midgley and the philosophy of mind is valuable. The Mary Midgley Archives at Durham University hold significant primary materials. The In Parenthesis project on the Oxford Quartet has produced substantial recent scholarship on the four women philosophers and their continuing influence.