Leiter Reports: A Philosophy Blog

Deja Vu all over again: Center for Research in Modern European Philosophy targetted for elimination again!

MOVING TO FRONT FROM MARCH 10:  SEE UPDATE

The last time it was at Middlesex University in 2010, and now it's the same thing again at Kingston University, where the program landed after the last disaster.   There's an open letter from students here.  Faculty have not yet been fired, but they almost certainly will be if the program closures go through.  Given the general level of economic distress in UK higher education, will another institution step forward to save the program?

UPDATE:  There is now a petition in support of the program here, which is accepting signatures.

Trump Administration makes demands on Columbia University...

...including treating anti-Zionism as anti-semitism (and thus making it a matter for univeristy discipline) and putting several departments into academic receivership for no other reason than faculty members hold views disfavored by the Trump Administration. Other demands are more banal, but these two are a frontal assault on academic freedom and free expression rights of faculty and students.  If Columbia doesn't go to court over this authoritarianism, then the capitulation is complete.

J.D. Vance vs. the Pope

Philosopher Steven Hales comments.

Annals of incompetence: a reminder

The two strongest criminal cases against Donald Trump--for election interference in Georgia, and for unlawfully retaining classified documents--were both botched:  the Georgia case because the local prosecutor, Fani Willis, decided to put her unqualified boyfriend into a key role in the case; and the latter, because Merrick Garland moved too slow.  If the former had been handled professionally, Trump would be in a Georgia jail cell, rather than the White House.  If the latter had been pursued promptly, there would have been a conviction, although it might not have sufficed to keep him out of the White House.  Missed opportunities are bitter at this point, but those responsible should not be forgotten.

Open access philosophy books: a thread, Part II

The last thread had 39 submissions, so I thought it's time for a second thread.  Instructions as before:

In light of the growing number of these volumes, I am going to run a thread periodically in which I invite authors or readers to share links to philosophical works that are currently or permanently "open access."  Please use your full name and a valid email address (the latter will not appear) and include the URL for the book (give the title and the author, if you are not the author).  Authors or readers can only say something about the work and what it tries to do.  Please indicate if the "open access" period is limited.

Submit your comment only once, it may take awhile to appear.

Letter to Congress from Union of Concerned Scientists and dozens of scientific associations...

...including the Philosophy of Science Association, about threats to funding of scientific research.

Speaking of ideology, the billionaire owner of the Washington Post changes editorial policies to focus on...

...personal liberties [e.g., like the kinds he enjoys] and the virtues of free markets.  What a surprise!

"How are Ideologies False? A Reconstruction of the Marxian Concept"

This article, in the Social Philosophy & Policy volume on "Ideology," is open access now for those who are interested.  The abstract:

For Karl Marx, ideological forms of consciousness are false, but how and in what respects? Ideologies must include some beliefs in order to be false, even if not all the beliefs that are inferentially related in the ideology are false, and even if there are (causally) related attitudes in the ideology that are neither true nor false. “Ideological” beliefs, however, are not simply false; their falsity has the specific property of not being in the interests of the agents who accept the ideology. One can make two kinds of mistakes about interests. One can mistake what is in one’s intrinsic interest or one can mistake what is in one’s extrinsic interest (that is, the means required to realize one’s intrinsic interests). Marx is mostly, but not exclusively, focused on mistakes about extrinsic interests; this is important in understanding how “morality” (which is not a matter of beliefs, but attitudes) can be ideological for Marx. I illustrate this analysis with some of Marx’s paradigmatic examples of ideological mistakes and offer an account of Marx’s conception of “interests.”

Trump's surprisingly sane position on nuclear weapons

In the midst of the disaster his Administration produces every week, at least there's this.

Blast from the past: Who was really the greatest philosopher of the 20th-century

A poll back in 2009, with more than a thousand votes.  The top five:

1.  Ludwig Wittgenstein (17%)

2.  Bertrand Russell (16%)

3.  David K. Lewis (12%)

4.  Martin Heidegger (10%)

5.  W.V.O. Quine (8%)

5.  John Rawls (8%)

The Lewis result says more about who was reading the blog in 2009, I suspect.  I'd pick Quine, but let's face it:  the 20th-century didn't have as many greats as the 19th-century!

Feel free to discuss, but post comments only once, as they may take awhile to appear.

Cruelty is not the point; subjugation and silencing is

An interesting interview with political theorist Corey Robin about Trump, Musk, McCarthyism and more.

"The world is not a quantum wave function"

Philosopher Valia Allori  comments.

More on the illegality of the cancellation of contracts and grants at Columbia for alleged Title VI violations

From CHE:

Samuel R. Bagenstos, who served as general counsel for the HHS under the Biden administration, said there are typically due-process requirements — such as statements of findings, hearings, and appeals — in cases alleging violations of civil-rights law. (Columbia has been accused of running afoul of Title VI, which bars discrimination in education based on race, color, and national origin.)

“Congress set forth specific procedures for suspending or terminating funds based on allegations of discrimination,” Bagenstos, a law professor at the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor, wrote via a LinkedIn message. “This purported ‘immediate cancellation’ complies with none of them.”

The administration’s decision comes without clear evidence of wrongdoing by Columbia under Title VI, said Jonathan S. Fansmith, senior vice president for government relations and national engagement at the American Council on Education.

“They don’t have a ruling from a judge. They don’t have a finding by an administrative agency. They haven’t tried to reach a resolution. They simply started cherry-picking money that’s going to Columbia and saying, ‘We’re not going to pay that,’” Fansmith said. “That’s not how we do this in the United States.”

This is why Columbia's capitulation is so foolish.

Columbia fallout begins: Harvard (another target for the Trumpistas) freezes faculty and staff hiring

Here.

Deja Vu all over again: Center for Research in Modern European Philosophy targetted for elimination again!

The last time it was at Middlesex University in 2010, and now it's the same thing again at Kingston University, where the program landed after the last disaster.   There's an open letter from students here.  Faculty have not yet been fired, but they almost certainly will be if the program closures go through.  Given the general level of economic distress in UK higher education, will another institution step forward to save the program?

Scathing speech by French Senator about our Nero, Trump

Here, if you haven't already seen it, with an English transcript as well.  

Petty tyrant serving as Interim US Attorney in Washington DC threatens Georgetown Law...

...and the Georgetown Dean responds forcefully!  This is how all educational leaders should deal with these little fascists in Trump's orbit.

Annals of political repression on campus: immigration authorities detain Palestinian activist at Columbia...

...despite his being a lawful permanent resident of the U.S.  Permanent residents have First Amendment rights, and his are being violated in the most egregious way.  If there is a  legal fund for Mr. Khalil, please let me know and I will post a link. Mr. Khalil does have a lawyer, and he will need one.

It's official: Columbia University capitulates

Here, in response to this.  The Trumpistas won't be satisfied, of course, until Columbia suppresses all speech critical of Israel or in support of the Palestinians.

Which school will be next?

Trump Admin pulls $400 million in grants/contracts from Columbia University over anti-semitism allegations

Just 48 hours later, the Trump gangsters have yanked $400 million in contracts and grants from Columbia University.  I'm sure this can't be legal, given the absence of even a semblance of due process which would be required for a Title VI sanction to be imposed.  Columbia's response to this robbery?

“We are reviewing the announcement from the federal agencies and pledge to work with the federal government to restore Columbia’s federal funding. We take Columbia’s legal obligations seriously and understand how serious this announcement is and are committed to combatting antisemitism and ensuring the safety and wellbeing of our students, faculty, and staff," a spokesperson for the university told NBC News.

Seriously?  The time for mealy-mouthed pablum is over.  Columbia needs to get their own Roy Cohn (Trump's favorite lawyer) on the case, who will respond roughly as Mr. Cohn did when his client, Mafia boss Carmine Galante, was dragged into court (scroll to the one minute mark:  short verison, it's all a publicity stunt, everything the government says about my client are lies).  Columbia, unlike Galante, has the advantage of not being guilty as charged!  Here's a draft of a more suitable response:

The allegation that Columbia University has tolerated anti-semitic misconduct is false and without basis, and the Administration knows that.  This is a political stunt, meant to intimidate universities and coerce them into suppressing lawful political speech, protected by the First Amendment.  The Univeristy will be taking the Trump Administration to court immmediately to seek remedies for its unlawful breach of contract and witholding of federal grants, all done without even a pretense of fair process.  We urge every university in the country to stand firm in protecting lawful speech.

I hope Columbia changes its tune quickly in the face of this plan to "destroy" the university.  Columbia needs to go on the offensive, and call out this fraud on the public for what it is.

Meanwhile, the ten universities being "visited" by the fake Anti-Semitism Task Force should be preparing their own legal and public relations campaigns.  Holmesian Bad Men only back down when costs are imposed on them.

 

 

Ben-Gurion University in Israel suspends professor for criticizing the IDF

Pretty egregious behavior by the university, which is forbidden by law from discriminating against employees based on their political viewpoint.  You can write to the BGU President, Dr. Daniel Chamowitz, to protest this violation of the free speech rights of a faculty member at:  [email protected]

(Thanks to Alon Harel for the pointer.)

More signs of the times: hiring freezes, reduced PhD admissions

The NYT reports:

Since taking office, the Trump administration has issued orders that threaten to broadly undercut the financial foundation of university based research, including deep reductions in overhead cost reimbursements through the National Institutes of Health. Court challenges have paused some of the cuts, but universities are bracing for uncertainty. The University of Pennsylvania could face a $250 million hit in N.I.H. funding alone....

In some cases, schools are pre-emptively cutting their expenses as a precautionary measure.

North Carolina State University announced on Feb. 14 that it was freezing most hiring. Stanford University announced on Feb. 26 that it was freezing staff hiring, citing “very significant risks” to the community. At the University of Louisville in Kentucky, President Kim Schatzel announced an “immediate pause” on faculty and staff hiring until July. She cited the potential loss of $20 to $23 million in N.I.H. research funding. Dozens of other schools have announced hiring freezes or “chills.”

Many of the cuts are now hitting graduate education...

A graduate program in biological sciences at the University of California, San Diego, usually enrolls 25 new graduate students a year. This year, the number will be 17....

Can AI hold office hours?

Several law professors trained AI on the class textbook, and AI still gave incomplete or wrong answers half the time!

UPDATE:  A senior scholar of ancient Greek and Roman philosophy elsewhere writes:

The other day I gave the same query to two different AI's (anthropic.claude-3.5-sonnet.v2 and openai.gpt-4o):

"I'm interested in Plato's Republic, and I'd like to read some recent scholarly literature concerning his proposals for censorship in books 2 and 3 of the Republic. Can you suggest some articles written within the last ten years?"

One gave me two citations, one gave me five. Of those seven, exactly 1 was a real citation to a real article. The other 6 were mix-and-match nonsense: the names of real authors (lots of my friends!), the names of real journals, and titles that were plausible pastiches of title-elements.  But none of them actually exist. 

People tell me that AI is useful for some things, but it is still far from a serious adjunct to scholarship.

Pain, the mind and the body

Interesting.

Deciding Between Admissions Offers: The Importance of Visiting/Talking With Current Students

MOVING TO FRONT FROM LAST YEAR (SINCE TIMELY AGAIN--originally posted March 6, 2009)

Applicants to PhD and MA programs are now receiving offers of admission and, if they are lucky, are beginning to weigh choices between different departments.  I want to reiterate a point made in the PGR, namely, that students are well-advised to talk to current students at the programs they are considering.   There are often things you will want to know that you won't glean from familiarity with the excellence of the faculty's work, even if that remains the most important, if defeasible, reason for choosing a particular department.  Here are some examples of information that no ranking, no departmental brochure, and no "official" departmental representive will tell you about; all of these are drawn from stories I've heard from students over the last few years about ranked departments (the departments will remain unnamed, obviously).  You can think of them as representing "types" of problems you should be aware of before enrolling.  I've tweaked some of the details to protect identities.

The Absent Faculty:  Are the faculty who look so good on paper actually around and interested in working with students?  I heard a story about a key senior person in one department who is an alcoholic, and who simply ignored his students.  In another department, almost all the graduate students had to sign an open letter to the faculty a number of years ago protesting the failure of faculty to return graded papers and their general lack of interest in mentoring the students.   In yet another department, a well-known senior member of the faculty spent so much time travelling and lecturing around the world, that he rarely had time to review or discuss work carefully with students. 

The Sexual Predator Faculty:  Are women treated as young philosophers and aspiring professionals, or do faculty regularly view them as a potential source for dates and sexual liasons?  It's a bit shocking to realize that this is still a live issue in some departments, but, sadly, it is.  Are faculty-student sexual relations common in the department?  What happens when the relations end?  Are there repeated cases of sexual harassment complaints against faculty in the department?  Do they ever result in discipline?  I suppose it is possible this could be an issue for male students, but all the reports I've gotten over the years have been from women victimized by male faculty. 

Trump Admin targets Columbia

Straight out of the fascist sycophant's playbook:  right after Linda McMahon was sworn in as Education Secretary, the attack began:

The Trump administration is threatening to cut tens of millions of dollars in federal funding for Columbia University, making the school the first major target in its effort to root out what it considers antisemitic harassment on college campuses.

A comprehensive review of Columbia University’s federal contracts and grants was announced Monday night, shortly after Linda McMahon was confirmed as the secretary of education in a party-line vote.

The review, which will be led by the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Education and the General Services Administration, has already identified $51.4 million in contracts between Columbia and the federal government that could be subject to stop-work orders. Health and Human Services said in a news release that the review was necessary “given Columbia’s ongoing inaction in the face of relentless harassment of Jewish students.”

Far more could be on the line: A federal task force will conduct a comprehensive review of the “more than $5 billion in federal grant commitments to Columbia University to ensure that the university is in compliance with federal regulations, including its civil rights responsibilities,” the news release said.

Lateral moves/retirements since the 2024 Philosophical Gourmet Report: 2024-25 edition

In addition to the separate posts announcing (generally tenured) faculty moves, I will keep a running list of all lateral moves (and retirements and deaths) not reflected in the faculty lists for the 2024 PGR (some moves that took place after the 2024 PGR were reflected in the faculty list, because the editors knew of them--the ones listed here were not reflected in the faculty lists evaluators saw).  I will start a new list for each academic year, so that the list does not get unwieldy.    I will move this to the front periodically, putting recent additions in bold.  Untenured lateral moves will be noted as such, otherwise the move is with tenure.  A lateral move is one from one tenure-stream position to another either into or out of a program offering the PhD or terminal MA.  In addition I will list retirements and also deaths of non-emeritus faculty.  Please e-mail me with additions or corrections.

Santiago Amaya (moral psychology, philosophy of action) from the University of Los Andes (Colombia) to Rice University.

Jc Beall (philosophical logic; philosophy of logic, mathematics & language; metaphysics) had to rescind (for personal reasons) acceptance of an offer from the National University of Singapore, so remains at the University of Notre Dame.

Jeremy Fantl (epistemology) from the University of Calgary to Ohio State University.

Michael Friedman (Kant, philosophy of science, 20th-century philosophy) has taken emeritus status at Stanford University.

Sebastian Gardner (Kant, 19th-century German philosophy) retired from University College London in Januray 2025.

Grace Helton (cognitive science, epistemology, moral psychology) from Princeton University (untenured) to the University of Rochester (tenured).

Graciella de Pierris (early modern philosophy) died in fall 2024.

Lawrence Shapiro (philosophy of mind & psychology) will retire from the University of Wisconsin, Madison at the end of the 2024-25 academic year.

Stewart Shapiro (philosophy of mathematics, philosophical logic) retired from Ohio State University in 2024, but continues to teach half-time at both Ohio State and the University of Connectcut, Storrs (he was listed as full-time, and not emeritus, at OSU in the fall 2024 PGR).

Andrew Stephenson (Kant, philosophy of mind, epistemology, logic) from the University of Southampton to LMU Munich.

Changes in the senior ranks typically affect specialty rankings, although can also affect the "overall" rankings (e.g., Stanford would drop out of the top 15, but will remain in the top 20).  

Another perspective on the Ukraine war

Ukraine has something both Russia and America want.  I still think NATO expansion was the bigger issue for Russia, but the American crime boss, Trump, has, as is his wont, made this economic case more plausible.

(Thanks to Ben Mitchell-Yellin for the pointer.)

Trump's most ominous moves in his first six weeks

The first six weeks of Trump have been much worse than I anticipated.  His fascist henchmen are better organized and things are moving much faster and in some exceptionally dangerous ways (quite apart from the serial lawlessness, which is what one would epxect from a Holmesian Bad Man).  Pardoning the miscreants involved in the stormtrooper riot at the Capitol was grotesque, of course, but even more concerning is the transparent effort to politicize the military and federal police, and insulate them from legal review.  

As one commentator put it:

President Trump’s decision to fire senior military leaders without cause is foolish and a disgrace. It politicizes our professional military in a dangerous and debilitating way. What frightens me even more is the removal of three judge advocates general, the most senior uniformed legal authorities in the Defense Department. Their removal is one more element of this administration’s attack on the rule of law, and an especially disturbing part....

I am worried about political loyalty becoming a criterion to hold high military positions. For now, I have confidence that our professional military has nurtured dozens of highly qualified senior officers capable of holding positions of trust and responsibility, people who can provide leadership at the Pentagon and offer sound military advice to our civilian leaders.

But that optimism doesn’t extend to the consequences of removing the military’s top judge advocates general, the senior military professionals who interpret and enforce the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the rules that guide troops in the field. They have the independent legal authority to tell any military commander or political appointee that an order from the president or the secretary of defense is unlawful, cannot be given and should not be obeyed.

Of the three JAGs who were dismissed, I know Lt. Gen. Charles Plummer and worked with him for more than three years. His legal advice was always sound, professional and well supported. It is hard to imagine there was any reason to remove him, other than the obvious one of replacing him with someone more loyal to Mr. Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth — and therefore more willing to interpret the law consistent with their desires.

If there is one characteristic of this president and this administration, it is the utter lack of respect for legal constraints [BL:  of course, he's a "Bad Man"]...

Mr. Trump and Mr. Hegseth will now get to choose the JAG leadership for all three military departments. One has to ask why JAG leadership was singled out for replacement. This is part of a much larger pattern of disrespect, even disdain, for the rule of law....

The meaning of all this is crystal clear:  Trump, and his fascist lackey Hegseth, want a military that will obey the unlawful orders of the "Boss of Bosses," i.e., Trump, including, e.g., repressing domestic dissent, policing "Democratic" cities, and ultimately, keeping Trump, or Trump lackeys in power, when he loses the next elections.  

Kafka comes to UC Riverside

A pretty horrifying account of administrative misconduct by the DEI police (note to investigative journalists:  do some digging on Dean Daryle Williams and his approach to "diversity" hiring):

I wrote the following words, in December 2022, to colleagues on a search committee: “[Candidate X] is lively and charming — and yes, Black, which is great — but I can’t say that I found his sophistication and experience up to the level of our top candidates.” Someone on the committee reported that sentence to administrators on my campus of the University of California at Riverside (UCR), and soon a punishment machine clicked into gear. It moved inexorably. Three unanimous votes by faculty committees in the university’s Academic Senate took my side, but administrators countermanded all three and the machine trundled on. After 20 months, the university chancellor placed a “letter of censure” into my file....

The letter declares that I made “unwarranted comments” about race....

Some background: At the University of California, all members of search committees undergo “training” in which they are reminded of a state law that prohibits use of race, gender, nationality, sexual orientation, and other personal characteristics as selection criteria. At the same time, trainees are strongly urged to pursue the university’s “diversity” goals, which ask that special attention go to those very criteria: race, gender, nationality, sexual orientation, etc. While it might be possible, in theory, to accommodate both of these countervailing demands, the practical effect on human beings in the real world is to induce a language game: a person employs diversity criteria while pretending not to....

The imbecile RFK Jr. (perhaps aided and abetted by the imbecile Elon Musk) setting the stage for everyone to die in the next pandemic

Unbelievable:

[N]ews that the Trump administration is reconsidering a government-funded study of an experimental H5N1 vaccine is generating fears that it may be on the chopping block, and that could take the fast-track option off the table, at least for one of the manufacturers of messenger RNA vaccines — the fastest vaccines to make and the easiest to mass produce.

At a time of elevated concerns about the potential for an H5N1 pandemic, the Department of Health and Human Services has confirmed that it is re-evaluating a nearly $600 million contract issued to Cambridge, Mass.-based Moderna by the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, a division of HHS. The contract, signed in the final days of the Biden administration, is designed to help Moderna develop and test the safety and efficacy of vaccines to protect against five subtypes of influenza that could prompt pandemics, including H5N1.

The Trump/Vance/Zelensky conflagration in the Oval Office

This piece gets it right:  the unusual thing here was that it was out in the open.  Of course, it is also unusual to have a pro-Russian President of the U.S.!  But Trump is a Mafia boss, he's playing Carlo Gambino to Russia's Vito Genovese, and the only question is dividing up the spoils of crime.

The New Yorker on Harvard, Claudine Gay, free speech etc.

Here, with a couple of quotes from yours truly, as well as Lawrence Summers, Steven Levitsky, Michael Clune, and others.

NATO is dead

I don't read Andrew Sullivan ordinarily; he is, for those who don't know, a conservative gay Catholic, a trio of identities that often ties him up in strange knots.  But he's right about this:

What [Trump] is doing is not about making a tough peace deal with Russia, recalibrating NATO, or protecting Ukraine’s democracy. He is merely setting the terms of a new alliance and relationship with the criminal Russian dictatorship — directed against the European democracies....

[W]hat other conclusion can one draw when the president cuts the Ukrainians and their European allies out of the dealmaking, has already conceded Ukraine’s conquered territory before any talks, insists that Ukraine started the war, that Zelensky, and not Putin, is the dictator, and is demanding reparations in advance ... from Ukraine, not Russia! The reparations amount to a US claim on 50 percent of Ukraine's mineral deposits forever. It’s the equivalent of “We’re gonna take Iraq’s oil.” It’s a form of imperial pillage. But it’s vintage Trump....

As for concessions from Russia for its unprovoked violation of an internationally recognized border? None that I can see, apart from stopping the war....Then the Russians get American sanctions lifted, re-entry to the G-7, vast new oil revenues, and a chance to take all of Ukraine next time....

In fact, Vance’s speech [in Munich] and Trump’s remarks make it clear that the US is no longer in alliance with Europe at all, but with Russia against Europe, and Europe’s liberal elites. The goal now is to replace those elites with Moscow-friendly governments, bent on repatriation of illegal migrants. Hence the stunning endorsement of the AfD by Elon Musk — the second most powerful man in the Trump administration.

After what the president and vice president have said this week, it’s fair to say, I think, that NATO is effectively over. No one can even faintly believe that the US under Trump would abide by Article 5 to defend another member state. Trump has just told the Baltic states: you’re on your own now. If you resist Russian control, you’ll deserve what you get.

Can Europe defend itself against Russia without the US?  The UK and France have nuclear arsenals, and the EU armies total nearly 1.5 million personnel, so the answer is almost certainly "yes."  Russia's conventional "military might" proved to be a paper tiger in Ukraine, so much so that North Korean troops have been called in to help.  This is not a military that is going to steamroll Europe, although it may well steamroll the Baltic States.

Although the Trump Administration has a number of China hawks, and Trump himself appears to have considerable animus towards China, I would think the Chinese government views these developments as strengthening its hand against Taiwan.  The post-WWII "peace"* secured by the U.S. nuclear umbrella is over.

*Obviously there was no peace when US or Soviet/Russian imperial interests were at stake, but in Europe and much of Asia there was.

An example of remarkably irresponsible advice to prospective PhD students, and the AI question

In the earlier thread about how to advise prospective PhD students these days, philosopher Tim Maudlin reports the advice he got as an undergraduate at Yale from Professor Robert Fogelin in 1980:  "He said—and I quote verbatim because one does not forget something like this—'Not even if you were Immanuel Kant would I suggest going to graduate school in philosophy.'" What insane advice to give to an undergraduate, at Yale no less, which has sent many dozens of students on to successful academic careers in philosophy since that time.  Even now, that advice would be crazy, and the situation is much more grim in the U.S. due to the Republican war on higher education.  Despite all that, there will still be jobs teaching philosophy, but fewer than even in the last thirty or forty years.

The earlier thread also included various prognostications about AI taking over many pedagogical tasks.  Count me skeptical, although for reasons we have noted before, AI will certainly change teaching in various ways.  But we should not be sanguine, and the effects are hard to predict with any confidence.   

The new, online "Political Philosophy" journal concludes a successful first year

Bob Goodin, the editor of Political Philosophy (and the ousted editor of Journal of Political Philosophy) kindly shared the details about the first year (20024):  there were 374 submissions, 7% of submissions were accepted, and 99% of decisions were made within three months (92% within two months).  It is good news that the new open access journal has been so successful (and its review time is exemplary!).

The political economy of immigration

Not the paranoid propaganda, but the reality.

Annals of craven cowardice, Hunter College edition

The Governor of New York is a disgrace, but so are the Hunter College officials who rolled over on their core responsibility to academic freedom so quickly:

The Hunter College job listing for Palestinian studies called for scholars who could “take a critical lens” to issues including “settler colonialism, genocide, human rights, apartheid” and other topics.

When the listing was posted last weekend, Jewish groups protested the inclusion of words that they said are antisemitic when applied to Israel. Their objections were first reported in The New York Post.

By Tuesday, Gov. Kathy Hochul demanded that the college, a part of the City University of New York, take down the listing.

“Governor Hochul directed CUNY to immediately remove this posting and conduct a thorough review of the position to ensure that antisemitic theories are not promoted in the classroom,” a spokesperson said in a statement, adding, “Hateful rhetoric of any kind has no place at CUNY or anywhere in New York State.”

The college, as part of the CUNY system, depends on state funding.

The university’s chancellor and board chair immediately approved Governor Hochul’s directive to remove the listing.

I feel for the "spokesperson" who has to issue such dishonest blather:  there is no "hateful" language in the ad, there is an ad that calls for applicants to investigate certain topics, which are real topics, in relationship to the Palestinians.  Faculty at Hunter College should be up in arms about this naked violation of the academic freedom rights of faculty.

(Thanks to Michael DeNiro for the pointer.)

More on the monster child's obsession with Canada

Suitably cutting, especially about those pathetic American media ideologists who treat this grotesque display seriously.

(Thanks to Evan Thompson for the pointer.)

More signs of the times: Northwestern University to make 10% cuts in non-personnel expenditures, and to scrutinize future hiring and pay raises centrally

Here.  Northwestern is a top 20 recipient of NIH funding, but the announcement also notes concern about the effect of an increased endowment tax.

An interview in Portuguese about legal realism, the American constitutional crisis, naturalism, and other topics...

...in a leading Brazilian newspaper, Estadão.  I was in Brazil last week for some lectures and seminars on legal philosophy, at the Pontifical Catholic University of Sao Paulo and the University of Sao Paulo.  I learned many very interesting things, which I'll write more about in the near future.  Below the fold, a photo of me and Professor Ronaldo Macedo on the grand staircase of the "old" law school building at USP (American law schools don't look like this!):

Heading for the doors of America

Not surprising:

On February 8, German newsmagazine Der Spiegel reported that the Max Planck Society—one of the world’s top scientific research institutions—is experiencing an uptick in applications from American scientists. Its president said the society regards the U.S. as “a new talent pool” at a time when the Trump administration seeks to cut billions in funding to the National Institutes of Health. There’s a deep historical irony in these recent developments: During the Third Reich, it was the Max Planck Society—then known as the Kaiser Wilhelm Society—that lost its best and brightest to the U.S. and other countries, including Albert Einstein.

A day prior, Irish broadcaster RTÉ reported that Ireland’s Department of Foreign Affairs has seen a 50 percent increase in the number of Americans seeking Irish passports, with some people specifically citing the new administration as a reason. Searches for terms like “dual citizenship” and “jus sanguinis” likewise saw significant spikes on Election Day and Inauguration Day, according to Google Trends. And a representative of Polaron, an Australian company that helps people obtain European citizenship by descent, told me that her firm has also “seen a steep increase in Americans wishing to leave their country, with many more keen to use their EU passport as a plan B"....

With Trump back in office and faithfully executing the blueprint for wrecking the country known as Project 2025 while collaborating with the world’s richest man to trash democracy and wage a war on brain cells in the federal government, a growing number of people in this country see the writing on the wall, and they’re looking for their bug-out plan.

A note about memorial notices

I have never tried to post memorial notices for all the many teachers of philosophy who die in a given year (I just do not have the time for that).  I have tried to limit memorial notices to those who are widely known in the profession.  Prior to 2020 that meant posting about 20-25 memorial notices per year.  In 2024, there were well over forty (scroll through the "Year in Review" category to see the annual lists on December 31 of every year).  I don't think it's that more well-known philosophers were dying, but rather that it's hard to say "no" to folks who ask for a memorial notice to be posted about someone they knew.  I'm going to start saying "no" a bit more, with apologies in advance.  But it's becoming clear that as I've grown more relaxed about the criteria for blog memorial notices, the demand for them has increased, and I will have to start saying 'no' a lot more.  Please feel free to share news with me of the death of philosophers, but please understand that I may not always post about them.  The main criteria are that the philosopher was widely known at least nationally, and preferably internationally, and known outside their narrow specialty (if they had a narrow specialty). Thank you.

More on the collapse of the AAUP...

...from law professor Matthew Finkin, a leading authority on the law of academic freedom (among other topics).

Canadian philosophy and American imperialism...

...at the APA blog.

(Thanks to Trevor Sanderson for the pointer.)

Stephenson from Southampton to LMU Munich

Andrew Stephenson (Kant, philosophy of mind, epistemology, logic), Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Southampton, will take up a position in philosophy ("Associate Professor" equivalent; "W2 Professor" in Munich's system) at LMU Munich in August 2025.

Advice to prospective PhD students in light of...well, everything!

Philosophy PhD student Charles Bakker writes:

I have always appreciated your efforts to help prospective graduate students make informed decisions as they consider which philosophy programs to apply to. In light of where things are at currently in our field - the shuttering of philosophy departments around the world, the attacks on academia by the U.S. government, the general lack of funding for graduate students [BL:  in some departments, in some the funding is very good], and the already hyper-competitive job market for recent PhD graduates - I would be curious to know what your guidance would now be to a prospective philosophy graduate student. Would you recommend that they think twice about entering a program? Would you advise them not to expect to get a job for X number of years on average after graduating? Bear in mind that as departments close, as more and more courses get offloaded to cheaper contract instructors, and as tenure gets stripped away in places controlled by right wing ideologues, the number of experienced academics entering the job market also increases, making it even less likely that junior academics will find a place in academia. 

The first five weeks of Trump II--which have been a disaster, worse than even I expected (and my expectations were low)--adds to all these concerns, since Trump II promises to be very bad for higher education in the U.S.  (I'll write more about that soon.)   Still my advice now would simply be a variation on the advice I've given individual students for the last 15 years or so (on the assumption that someone is getting a PhD with an eye to earning a living as a PhD philosopher):  do not go to a graduate program unless you get funding; and only go to a top PhD program, if not overall, then at least in your field.  What is a "top PhD program"?  Top 20ish in the U.S. is a reasonable cut-off, with any other Anglophone program ranked equivalent being comparable.  Examples of "top" in a specialty would be UC Irvine's program in "Logic and Philosophy of Science."   These are good rules of thumb.  If you are considering schools not in these categories, scrutinize the placement data carefully.   There are far too many schools offering a PhD in philosophy, as we have noted before, and if these PhD programs are adequately funding their students, then that is something.   But I do think now is an especially important moment for PhD programs in the U.S. to think about whether they ought to exist.  Terminal M.A. programs (which I started emphasizing in the PGR a quarter-century ago) have played a very important role in helping develop students for success in PhD programs and also helping students figure out whether an academic career is for them.  The profession, especially given what's coming, could benefit from more good terminal MA programs and fewer PhD programs.

I would invite perspectives from readers but you must include a full name if you are a faculty member and, regardless, a valid email address (which will not appear).

Determinism

The blog, from philosopher Stephen Maitzen.

If Trump defies the courts, what can the courts do?

A very informative piece by two NYU law professors.  Because court orders are usually directed at particular officials within agencies, courts can cause those miscreants some pain, including imposing financial penalties they have to pay in their personal capacity.  At the end of the day, of course, law runs out, and the best protection is that there will be an economic calamity if Trump the Holmesian Bad Man defies the courts.  My guess is he won't cross that red line, for the same reason that his nominees related to financial and business matters were fairly normal Republican choices, rather than batshit crazies like RFK Jr. and Peter Hegseth.  But we'll soon know whether that is too optimistic!