Associate Professor of Philosophy Paul Schofield has become an expert source on the social and moral issues surrounding homelessness, writing opinion pieces on what he calls the “unique injustice” associated with being unhoused and prompting further conversation on the topic.
In August, a Seattle publication featured a profile of a photographer who chronicles the homeless in his community. The author of that profile had learned about photographer J.M. Simpson from Schofield’s posts on X about him.
Faculty in the News: Bates Bylines and Sources
Associate Professor of Philosophy Paul Schofield’s research focuses on moral and political philosophy as well as the philosophy of film. He teaches classes on ethics and politics, the history of philosophy, and the philosophy of film.
Bates News had a conversation with Schofield about his exploration of homelessness in America — including his widely distributed Washington Post opinion piece — and the ways he hopes to deepen the progressive response to the issue.
BN: In April you tweeted out a series of posts on X, formerly known as Twitter, about photographer J.M. Simpson’s work in Washington State, humanizing the lives of unhoused people living communally and otherwise. Your first post was shared something like 24,000 times, and it drew the notice of a writer for Seattle Metropolitan magazine who contacted Simpson and did an interview with him (and you) that ran last month. How did you come to know Simpson’s work?
Schofield: I’d published an op-ed in The Washington Post and when you do that, you get some e-mails! Some were encouraging, some were angry, and some were just attempts to share thoughts.
One came from a formerly unhoused individual who linked to something he’d written. After a little back and forth, he told me I should look at the photography of someone he knew. Now, I didn’t really know what to expect—this was a more or less random person telling me to look at his friend’s pictures, and my expectations were low, quite honestly. But I got in contact with the friend and when I opened up the attachments to his e-mail I was absolutely astounded. It was just a wonderful gift that fell right into my lap!
BN: Were you surprised by how widely your posts were shared? Have you been in touch with Simpson since the Seattle Met piece appeared?
Schofield: It took off more than I could have hoped. But I was intentionally aiming to get a wider audience for his work and so I thought for a while about when and how to write a thread that might get some attention.
I asked Simpson ahead of time if he was OK with this, and he said, “Sure.” After the post went viral, I told him about it (he’s not on Twitter/X), and he said that was great, but his main hope was that this would bring more attention to the issue of homelessness.
Some people say things like that just because that’s what you’re supposed to say. But I feel like he really meant it. How odd! At any rate, I was glad his work got so much recognition (in addition to being glad about bringing attention to the issue, of course). And yes, he and I have talked recently. We’ve Zoomed several times in the last few months, and I’m going out to Olympia during fall break to meet with him and to visit the encampments out there. Hopefully some collaboration will come out of it.
BN: This issue has seemingly become a key part of your scholarship. In 2022 you were featured in the University of New Hampshire’s Philosophy Colloquium Series, arguing that homelessness should be considered in a different light than other social justice matters because it tests our democratic commitments as a liberal democracy.
This May, you gave a talk entitled “Homelessness and the Lewiston Auburn Community: Can We Move Forward Together?” that was covered by the Lewiston Sun Journal, What sparked your interest in this topic? Is it a typical subject for a philosopher to tackle?
“I began thinking philosophically about the ways in which homelessness was a unique form of injustice and not just an instance of extreme poverty.” — Paul Schofield
Schofield: During COVID, while we were all told to go to our homes and stay there, I read some stories about how unhoused individuals had nowhere to go and how this was creating an enormous burden for them. Mostly out of boredom, to be honest (the early days of COVID were boring), I began volunteering at a food pantry and soup kitchen. It seemed like a way to be helpful.
But I’m a philosopher, and so while I was scooping mashed potatoes or handing out bags of apples, I began thinking philosophically about the ways in which homelessness was a unique form of injustice and not just an instance of extreme poverty.
Homelessness, it seemed to me, was more like wholesale exclusion from society. So much of what we do in society presumes that people have a home to go to (like when we all retreat to our homes during a pandemic). This point seems even more relevant now that the Supreme Court has said cities can make laws prohibiting sleeping outdoors — if there’s such a law, and you don’t have somewhere to go, it’s as if your very right to exist has been taken away!
“Progressives should be more concerned about the crime and disorder that results from homelessness because crime and disorder make it hard for everyone to live together peacefully.” — Paul Schofield
Anyway, I started talking about these ideas with people while volunteering and they encouraged me to write about them. So that’s what I’m doing now. There’s been some writing by philosophers about homelessness, but not a ton. It’s been rewarding to think and write on a topic that hasn’t already been debated to death.
BN: That Washington Post piece from November 2023 spread far and wide. Many other publications republished it. What was the impact of such a prominent opinion piece placement?
Schofield: The basic idea in the piece was that progressives should be more concerned about the crime and disorder that results from homelessness because crime and disorder make it hard for everyone to live together peacefully. Crime and disorder also generate resentment toward those who are unhoused, making it more difficult to address the problem in a decent way.
I heard from a lot of readers when the piece came out. Some of the reactions were unsurprising — there were people who resent the homeless and were happy that I was (they believed) affirming their resentment, and there were those who were angry that I was giving aid and comfort to conservatives.
That said, I received a lot of thoughtful feedback from people who see the homelessness in their community and the strife it creates, but want to be humane toward those who are suffering. These correspondences made me realize the extent to which people are genuinely conflicted about homelessness and are struggling with how to deal with it. I hope the op-ed helped them think through things a little bit.
BN: You were on Maine Public’s Maine Calling in April, talking about the social contract and common decency and that op-ed came up. You told listeners you were trying to make a progressive case for taking seriously those sorts of complaints. Which relates to the social contract. Can you elaborate?
Schofield: I strongly believe that we should have compassion for those who are unhoused. But I also think we need to consider things from the perspective of the parents who can’t let their child play in the park because there are syringes everywhere, or the woman who is working as a cashier and is afraid to walk home from her night shift because there are people with mental-health troubles on the streets who harass her. Their perspectives matter and a productive conversation with them will take their worries seriously.
BN: As you continue to explore this topic, what comes next? A book?
Schofield: I have been working on a book tentatively called Exiled in Their Own Land: How Our Unhoused Citizens Get Excluded from Everything and the Need for a Homeless Civil Rights Movement. My agent and I are approaching publishers as we speak. Stay tuned!
Categories Academic Life Society and culture
