Leiter Reports: A Philosophy Blog

PGR surveys, reminder

Professor Pynes asked me to remind those who took the surveys in 2014 or 2017 of the following:  "University systems have become far more aggressive in blocking external emails," especially those with embedded links.  Professor Pynes asks that "folks who have participated in the past, who haven't gotten an invitation, but want to participate [should] contact me directly at CA-Pynes@wiu.edu.  I can send a link back via my .edu email and it should make it through."  

The 2021 survey is currently scheduled to close on Monday, November 1 at 11:59 pm Mountain time in the U.S. 

Blast from the past: Janiak & Mercer on forgotten early modern female philosophers

Back in 2015, with some discussion in the comments as well.

Right-wing newspapers have a selective interest in freedom of expression, part 373

The Washington Free Beacon broke a story about a diversity bureaucrat gone mad at Yale Law School, and yesterday ran a follow-up on the reaction of legal academics.  It included this quote:

Martha Nussbaum, a left-wing legal theorist at the University of Chicago, said it "would be appalling and chilling" for any administrator to suggest that "the Federalist Society is per se racist," as Yale Law School diversity director Yassen Eldik alleged. Nussbaum's Chicago colleague Brian Leiter—who has argued that future generations are "doomed" if America does not one day embrace socialism—agreed, telling the Free Beacon that "Yale has some serious academic freedom and free expression problems."

What I actually told the reporter was this:  "Between DEI administrators running amok, and rich donors meddling in courses,  I would say Yale has some serious academic freedom and free expression problems!"  No mention of the latter in the story, which is, in fact, the much more serious recent violation exposed at Yale.

Spinoza and religion

Interesting  book review at the TLS.

Richard Marshall interviews Friedrich Nietzsche (Basel, retired)...

...at 3:16 AM.  Nietzsche is in fine form! Richard really brings out the best in his interviewees.

Is it even lawful to consider "diversity" in hiring?

MOVING TO FRONT FROM APRIL 9, SINCE TIMELY AGAIN (ALSO SEE THE INSTRUCTIVE DISCUSSION IN THE COMMENTS)

In a discussion of the earlier poll, one junior faculty member asked:

I was a bit surprised to see so many people admit to doing more than #1 [i.e,. outreach to candidates from underrepresented groups]. My impression was that even #2 [using "diversity" as a tie-breaker] violates most universities' nondiscrimination policies and was illegal in the U.S. I wonder if some legally or other institutionally informed readers might be able to shed some light here.

Title VII says that "an unlawful employment practice is established when the complaining party demonstrates that race, color, religion, sex, or national origin was a motivating factor for any employment practice, even though other factors also motivated the practice" (https://www.eeoc.gov/statutes/title-vii-civil-rights-act-1964). The Department of Labor says that universities' affirmative action obligations as federal subcontractors do not allow "the use of race to be weighed as one factor among many in an individual’s application when rendering hiring, employment or personnel decisions, as racial preferences of any kind are prohibited under the authorities administered by OFCCP" (https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ofccp/faqs/AAFAQs). What am I missing here?

Apart from the legal issue, my own institution's DEI compliance office has told me that it violates our university's nondiscrimination policies to consider a candidate's race or gender once they have applied, even as a "tiebreaker." That's why HR doesn't pass that information along to hiring committees. I would be interested to hear whether individuals or departments who practice #2 or #3 have actually consulted their compliance offices about this, and what their institutions' policies are.

I put this question to Professor Michael Selmi, a leading employment law and civil rights expert, now at Arizona State University.  He kindly gave permission to share his answer:

White's Professorship in Moral Philosophy at Oxford endowed and renamed

Oxford's announcement is here.  Some friends on FB were puzzled that the endowment wasn't used to create a new Chair.  I suspect the explanation is that the White's Professorship was not endowed at all, but supported by regular university funds, and that this endowment will take some of the strain off of Oxford's budget, which is very strained post-Brexit.   2.8 million euros in endowment will produce spendable income of about 80-100,000 euros per year, which would likely cover half or more of salary for the position.  Comments are open for readers who may know more.

ADDENDUM:  As pointed out in the comments, the endowment is in GBP, not euros, so the income from the endowment is likely to support more like half to two-thirds of the salary.

Richard Marshall interviews Anna Alexandrova (Cambridge)...

...at 3:16 AM.

Carl Schmitt in China...

...or why the CCP is interested in Schmitt.

(Thanks to Matt Kramer for the pointer.)

UPDATE:  A PhD student with a special interest in China writes with some useful perspective:

Great moments in obscure rock 'n' roll: Tractor, "Make the Journey," 1972

British psychedelic/space rock band, whose style was probably a few years too late.  Still, this song surely would have been a sensation in the summer of 1968 (especially if they cut the last few minutes!):

 

Contra Ibsen, the majority isn't *always* wrong

And this is a majority in the Benighted States of America, no less:

A broad majority of Americans — more than 6 in 10 — believes the Supreme Court bases its decisions more on the justices’ political views than on the Constitution and law, a national survey released Wednesday shows....

What is it like to be a philosopher? Mike Huemer (Colorado) edition

MOVING TO FRONT FROM OCTOBER 14--UPDATED

Here.  An amusing interview, as one would expect.  He thinks there's not enough substantive philosophy on blogs like this one, but I guess the evidence suggests that trying to do actual philosophy on blogs doesn't always go well!

UPDATE:  Philosopher Colin McGinn responds to an allegation in Huemer's interview.  (Thanks to David Gordon for the pointer.)

Blast from the past: What is philosophy?

Peter Hacker's take, back in 2013, with a discussion.

A neuroscientist on "the self"

Anil Seth (Sussex) discusses his view at IAITV.

Richard Marshall's email was hacked earlier today, but he's now got it back under control

This is his btinternet.com address, but the hackers inserted a 75 in it.  If you reply to the hacker's email, you'll get a reply from a gmail address looking for $$$ for a "gift"!  Don't reply if you got one of these.

Lord Devlin's elderly daughter accuses him of sexually abusing her as a child

Story here.  Devlin is best-known in philosophical and jurisprudential circles for defending the view (against H.L.A. Hart) that the criminal law should concern itself with "immorality," even when no one was harmed.  At issue then was the criminalization of homosexuality, which was legalized shortly thereafter in Britain.  In  light of this revelation, one might surmise that there was more than a little reaction formation going on with Devlin's side of the debate.

Classroom policies/strategies for free expression and inclusion?

Philosopher Jason Swartwood (Saint Paul College) writes:

As a reader of your blog, I appreciate the discussions of free expression and academic freedom that often take place there.  One aspect I haven't seen much discussion of is classroom policies in which instructors explicitly state and discuss with students the value of free expression in their classroom so as to encourage productive discussion.  Since I teach mostly controversial topics (in Ethics, Bioethics, and Feminist Philosophy courses, especially), I find it very helpful to explicitly discuss what will be our shared standards on the first day of class.  This has so far (fingers crossed!) helped students deal productively with their discomfort even when we're discussing things such as (to pick probably the most inflammatory examples) gender critical views of gender or Tuvel's transracialism analogy.  

I thought it would be nice to have a discussion of what other faculty do to proactively head-off misguided attempts to stifle free expression in the classroom while also promoting an inclusive classroom atmosphere.  As an example of what I mean, I have a classroom policy I use posted on my website, along with exercises I do on the first day to get students talking about it.  Given the volatile climate we live in, I thought it would be useful to share ideas about how we proactively promote and model important values like free expression and inclusion.

Comments are open for suggestions and ideas from readers.

Still more on Professor Stock's situation at Sussex

This bit from the article was especially striking:

Three of Stock’s four fellow professors of philosophy at Sussex told me that they supported her academic freedom, but none would say so publicly, despite more than 200 UK academic philosophers signing an open letter supporting Stock’s and others’ “right to raise concerns on this matter”.

MIT debacle makes the NY Times

One thing the article (and the letter from the Provost) make clear is that the leadership at MIT just don't get it.  An excerpt (and do see, below the fold, the astonishing comments of Professor Phoebe Cohen of Williams College):

“Besides freedom of speech, we have the freedom to pick the speaker who best fits our needs,” said Robert van der Hilst, the head of the department at M.I.T. “Words matter and have consequences.”

Ever more fraught arguments over speech and academic freedom on American campuses have moved as a flood tide into the sciences. Biology, physics, math: All have seen fierce debates over courses, hiring and objectivity, and some on the academic left have moved to silence those who disagree on certain questions.

A few fields have purged scientific terms and names seen by some as offensive, and there is a rising call for “citational justice,” arguing that professors and graduate students should seek to cite more Black, Latino, Asian and Native American scholars and in some cases refuse to acknowledge in footnotes the research of those who hold distasteful views....

Blast from the past: Ted Honderich, persona non grata

Back in 2005, with some interesting comments from readers.

Interesting perspective on the growth of academic bureaucracy and other woes

Revisiting a 1971 book by the sociologist Robert Nisbet.

Hi-Phi Nation is starting a series of podcasts on David Lewis

You can listen to the first one here.

No wonder Schopenhauer was a pessimist!

This is the famous letter to a young Arthur from his Mom:

Nietzsche blog

For those interested, there are (finally) a couple of new posts, including the updated annual guide to post-graduate studies.

SSHRC (the major research funding source in Canada) now requiring "diversity" in "research questions, methods, theoretical frameworks, literature reviews, analyses, and the interpretation and dissemination of findings"

MOVING TO FRONT FROM OCTOBER 15 (first posted October 13)--INTERESTING DISCUSSION CONTINUES IN THE COMMENTS

A philosopher in Canada called to my attention this development, which would seem to have a significant impact on academic freedom.   As this philosopher wrote:

I'm not opposed to thoughtful projects on topics related to diversity in various ways, but I worry that a requirement like this for *all* proposals is going to drastically reduce (if not eliminate) the funds given to great projects that just happen to have nothing to do with diversity.

Lots of my colleagues in Canada are terrified to say anything publicly about this that even resembles mild criticism (myself included). I'm hoping you might draw some attention to this issue on your blog.

One of the strange things about this initiative is that Canadian law is not beholden to "diversity" the way American law is since Bakke.  Why not just specify that a certain amount of SSHRC funding will go to certain minority groups, and leave it at that?  Does anyone know what's behind this?  Given the climate of fear that apparently obtains, anonymous posts are fine, but please include a real email address, that will not appear.

Regarding General Powell

A useful reminder.

AFA letter to Michigan about the mistreatment of Professor Sheng

Here (earlier coverage).

Blast from the past: the most important philosopher of the past 200 years?

A poll back in 2009.

Social Epistemology, and the Epistemology of the Media and the Internet

Philosopher Joseph Shieber (Lafayette) has a fair-minded and interesting discussion of my recent paper.  I agree with a number of points he makes, including, as I argue in the paper, for the need for a restored Fairness Doctrine in the traditional media. I think Professor Shieber understates the distinctive contribution of the Internet to mayhem and ignorance (which I discuss, in particular, at pp. 20-23), but that's certainly arguable.

After a two-year hiatus...

...my homepage is updated, for anyone who's interested--that includes talks (many of which were obviously derailed by the pandemic), video and audio interviews, former students, etc.

AFA sends second letter to MIT after MIT Provost tries to rationalize cancellation of Professor Abbot's lecture because of his "incorrect" views about diversity

The new AFA letter is here, and the MIT Provost's letter is here.  The Provost really doesn't get it.  (Earlier coverage.)

Cambridge University Press merged with "Cambridge Assessment" (which produces exams)

Official announcement here, although philosopher Richard Eldridge (Swarthmore/Tennessee), who called this to my attention, has heard a report of dozens of layoffs, including the production manager of the journals division.  If readers have more information, comments are open.

More on the SSHRC's "diversity" initiative

Philosopher Jason Bell (New Brunswick) writes:

I appreciate your note about SSHRC.

I am a philosopher on SSHRC review committees.

I am worried that this new scoring component will discriminate against philosophers who examine non-diverse essences (questions in pure logic; the greater is greater than the lesser for all people, etc). It will favor social sciences in which particular communities are examined. Diverse questions are certainly important, but it is also important to figure out what we share in common.

SSHRC has done valuable work in promoting philosophical research. This new requirement will make this more difficult, in my opinion.

Readers concerned about this might write to some of the key scholars on the SSHRC executive committee --perhaps the chair, the president, and one philosophy professor.  Names and addresses below the fold:

PGR surveys update

PGR surveys went out only about ten days ago, and Professor Pynes tells me there are already more than 150 philosophers who have completed or are in process of completing the survey.  Professor Pynes also tells me, however, that, "University systems have become far more aggressive in blocking external emails," especially those with embedded links.  Professor Pynes asks that "folks who have participated in the past, who haven't gotten an invitation, but want to participate [should] contact me directly at CA-Pynes@wiu.edu.  I can send a link back via my .edu email and it should make it through."   People who participated in 2017 or 2014 would all have received invitations this time around.  Do check your spam filters too!

Books with advice about the dissertation stage of a humanities PhD?

MOVING TO FRONT FROM OCTOBER 14--MANY INTERESTING SUGGESTIONS IN THE COMMENTS, MORE WELCOME

Adam Patterson, a PhD student in philosophy at Syracuse University, writes:

I was wondering if you wouldn't mind putting the following question to your readers: what are some good books that are about (and meant to help with) the dissertation phases of a humanities Ph.D.? I'm looking for recommendations, which might be useful to others in a similar position as me.

I'm in the dark about his; comments are open for suggestions.  Please do try to say something about the book (or article) you're recommending.

Great moments in obscure rock 'n' roll: Comus, "Song to Comus," 1971

Eclectic British folk/psychedelic/progressive band, they have enjoyed a cult following for many years.  This song comes from their debut album:

 

2nd assassination of an MP in Britain in five years!

That's pretty ghastly, and a very bad sign.  If guns were more readily available, one suspects there would have been even more incidents.  The UK, like the US, is in trouble.

The "cloak and dagger" campaign against Professor Kathleen Stock

The Times of London reports; an excerpt:

Rio Jacques, 23, a second-year history student at the university...is the first activist from the campaign to speak openly, added: “It’s very much cloak and dagger, but that’s not the way we want it to be. The masks — it’s not meant to be threatening. It’s just for the protection of the people that want to be vocal.

“No one wants to lose their place at university, but at the same time we don’t want to sacrifice our right to defend ourselves with our words.”

Jacques, who is transgender, is one of the leaders of Reclaim Sussex and is involved with Anti Terf Sussex, the two most prominent groups spearheading the campaign....

The group’s suggested reading includes an essay by Christa Peterson, a PhD student at the University of Southern California. For the past two years years, Peterson has led a Twitter campaign against Stock, culminating in the essay published earlier this year.

In praise of anger

A discussion of the new book by philosopher Myisha Cherry (UC Riverside) at The New Yorker.

(Thanks to John Martin Fischer for the pointer.)

AI Chatbot, part 2

Inspired by Dr. Myers, philosopher David Lobina (Barcelona) also had a "chat" with the AI chatbot.  As Dr. Lobina wrote to me:  "[I]t seems the chatbot likes to make up papers, people, and meetings."  The conversation is below the fold.

More on the academic freedom crisis at Yale

Yale philosophy professor Jason Stanley comments on the events we have recently noted.

The attack on tenure in Georgia

The vote to "change" the tenure rules yesterday by the Georgia System's Board of Regents is of enormous significance, both for tenure and for academic freedom--for now at state universities (since other states will follow suit if Georgia's change survives legal challenges), but I suspect this will creep into the private universities as well, since it would be a cost-cutter's dream come true:  to be able to fire tenured faculty without due process or having to show actual "cause."   This article explains the new Georgia rules:

The changes will replace a tenure system that allows professors to be fired only for a specific cause following a thorough peer review process with a new system that permits professors to be dismissed if they fail to take corrective steps following two consecutive subpar reviews....

A key change in the new policy adds student success as a category to be evaluated along with teaching and research.

The new "student success" metric seems to be designed to make faculty work more mentoring and advising students, but I'm not sure.  (Comments are open for readers with more information about that.)  The crucial change, however, is eliminating the "for cause" criterion of dismissal and its associated procedural safeguards, most importantly, faculty peer review.

ADDENDUM:  You can see the changed language at pp. 38 ff. of this document.

Board of Regents of Georgia public universities will vote to abolish tenure today

MOVING TO FRONT FROM THIS MORNING--UPDATED

If this move survives legal challenges, it will undoubtedly spread.  And in "red" states, there will be a real risk in the years ahead of a purge of faculty for political reasons.  Perhaps at the last minute, the Board will surprise everyone, but I'm not optimistic.

UPDATE:   The Board has approved the "changes."

The ideas of Wang Huning, one of the most influential people in the CCP

I'd never heard of this scholar turned powerful political advisor before a Chinese scholar elsewhere called this piece to my attention.

ADDENDUM:  A philosopher elsewhere points out to me that reactionary Catholics in the U.S. are very fond of this guy's ideas!

Talking about the Chinese Room argument with a chatbot

Philosopher Blake Myers works "on issues at the intersection of philosophy, artificial intelligence, and data science."   He continues:

Most recently, I have been working with deep learning AI chatbots to assess their abilities with respect to self reports. One of these chatbots is GPT-3, which is arguably the best chatbot in existence right now, and one that has attracted the attention of some philosophers. Below I have copied and pasted a recent dialog session that I had with GPT-3 that I found interesting, and I thought your readers might enjoy reading it, as well.

There's more at Dr. Myers's homepage.   The dialog is below the fold:

A triumph for the fascists: OUP India decides not to print book about Modi's attack on democracy

Amazing.  It's just further confirmation of the damage Modi has done in India.

(Thanks to Richard Marshall for the pointer.)

The power of the "woke" and the impotence of the left in America

There is much to agree with in this essay by Freddie DeBoer; some excerpts:

The left-of-center is in a profoundly strange and deeply unhealthy place. In the span of a decade or less a bizarre form of linguistically-radical but substantively-conservative identity neoliberalism descended from decaying humanities departments in elite universities and infected social media like Tumblr and Twitter, through which it conquered the media and entertainment industries, the nonprofit industrial complex, and government entities as wide-ranging as the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights and the brass of the Pentagon. That movement now effectively controls the idea-and-story generating power of our society, outside of explicitly conservative media which exists in a large silo but a silo all the same. On any given day the most powerful institutions in the world go to great lengths to mollify the social justice movement, to demonstrate fealty, to avoid its wrath....

Open letter from UK philosophers in support of academic freedom for Prof. Kathleen Stock and at the University of Sussex

Here.  Additional UK-based philosophers (faculty and graduate students) are invited to sign.  A distinguished group of signatories already, including Crispin Wright, Timothy Williamson, David Papineau, Helen Beebee, Samir Okasha, James Ladyman, Quassim Cassam, Mary Margaret McCabe, Emma Borg, Mike Martin, Christopher Janaway, and many others.

(Thanks to Mary Leng for the pointer.)

"Harry Frankfurt and the Senate Parlimentarian"

Philosopher Ben Burgis comments in Jacobin.

(Thanks to David Zimmerman for the pointer.

It's fair to say compensation for university Presidents is out of control

The current Michigan President is getting some package, considering how badly he mismanaged COVID, among other things.   No doubt this is because Boards of Trustees (or Regents) are made up of the leading lights of corporate America, who are used to wealth capture by those at the top.