Leiter Reports: A Philosophy Blog

Hillary Clinton really is an appalling shill for the prudent wing of the ruling class...

...as this makes clear.

ADDENDUM:  Some useful context.

And now: Rousseau on Twitter...

...with help from politcal theorist Boris Litvin (Stetson).

UPDATE:  And a skeptical response from a Rousseau scholar on Twitter.

Malik on Scruton...

...at The Guardian.  Of the various criticisms of Scruton, this seems to me the most measured and strongest version I've seen in the popular media.  (Here's an unmeasured critical comment:  a number of years ago, I picked up the new edition of Scruton's purported critique of "new left" thinkers.  It was sophomoric, almost beyond belief in how silly it was.   The contrast with his work in aesthetics was stunning.   Obviously, his political prejudices had a bad effect on his philosophical judgment.)

(Thanks to Phil Gasper for calling the Malik piece to my attention.)

Historian Clayborne Carson (Stanford) interviewed about the NYT 1619 Project and what is called the "Civil Rights Movement"

Here; an excerpt:

Q.  100 years after the Civil War this mass movement of very oppressed people takes place in the American South and then, as you said, it also grips the big cities. Why does it happen when it happens? Why in the 1960s?

A. ...Among the most important changes leading to the articulation of rights was the spread of literacy. As people became more literate it became harder to dominate them. Literacy in the African American tradition, from Frederick Douglass learning to read to Malcolm X being in jail and learning to read the dictionary—literacy is itself a freedom. One of the commonalities of oppressed people is that they get all of their information through people who dominate them.

For most of human history people never got more than 20 miles from where they were born. They knew very little of the world. There was no way of overcoming that until you could get to the point where you could read. That was often purposeful. Dominant people wanted to control information. You don’t want people working for you to know that they can walk 20 miles and find better conditions. Of course, you can also mystify them by religion and say, there’s this sacred book. You can’t read it, but I can interpret if for you, and tell you what your role in society is. So, literacy is huge.

Best introductory texts in philosophy of mind?

MOVING TO FRONT FROM JANUARY 16--MORE COMMENTS WELCOME

Continuing with our new series about the best introductory texts in various areas of philosophy, I now invite readers to name what they think are the best introductory texts in philosophy of mind. As before, don't just name a text, but say something about why you think it's particularly notable or valuable.  Although you don't have to sign  your comment, I do think signed ones will carry more weight with readers.

Peer-reviewed journal publishes a peer-reviewed paper some people don't like...

...so it's time for a petition, which, after 24 hours and despite being linked from the Daily Snooze this morning, has only some two dozen signatories.  (UPDATE:  after 48 hours, 48 signatories!)  It was launched by famed Twitter tough guy Mark Alfano (Macquarie), seen here threatening the paper's author, graduate student Nathan Cofnas (Oxford) (says Mafia Mark to Mr. Cofnas:   "You're about to learn why people generally avoid fucking with me").   Good to get confirmation that not only is there no norm against criticizing graduate students for their public acts and statements (which no one, other than graduate students on Twitter, believed of course), but there apparently isn't even a norm against launching a petition against the "vulnerable" and threatening them Mafia-style!

The petition is being ignored because it is so obviously foolish.  I'll give the last word on that to philosopher David Wallace (Pittsburgh), quite possibly the only adult who comments reguarly at the Daily Snooze:

Here we go again.

In the first place, the petition’s description of the paper doesn’t look factually accurate. It claims that the paper (i) “argues that the best explanation of differences in IQ scores between racial and ethnic groups is genetics”, and (ii) “completely neglects the role played by environmental injustice, housing segregation, and related forms of discrimination in producing these differences.”

As for (i), the paper’s discussion of the science argues only that it is a scientifically serious possibility that racial IQ differences have a genetic component, not that it’s cut-and-dried that it does (far less that the difference is 100% due to genetics). The section of the paper summarizing the science ends “As of now, there is nothing that would indicate that it is particularly unlikely that race differences will turn out to have a substantial genetic component.” Furthermore, that conclusion (which occurs 6 pages into a 24-page paper, at the end of a 3-page discussion of the science) is all that the author needs, because the main question the paper asks is whether we should actively prevent research on the question, and to make that an interesting question we only need to know that a genetic component isn’t scientifically unserious, not that it’s scientifically proven. (And, I should add, the author’s all-things-considered defense of allowing research on the topic is fairly nuanced, and gives a pretty sympathetic hearing to the arguments against.)

Preposterous philosophical views: the poll results

With more than 1300 votes in last Friday's poll, here are the results for "most" to "least" preposterous philosophical view:

1. External world skepticism  (Condorcet winner: wins contests with all other choices)

2. Realism about possible worlds  loses to External world skepticism by 621–597

3. Panpsychism  loses to External world skepticism by 640–574, loses to Realism about possible worlds by 619–599

4. Libertarianism about free will  loses to External world skepticism by 832–366, loses to Panpsychism by 832–366

5. Grounding is a real and unitary relation  loses to External world skepticism by 804–285, loses to Libertarianism about free will by 587–444

6. Non-naturalist moral realism  loses to External world skepticism by 866–328, loses to Grounding is a real and unitary relation by 515–499

I suspect the results tell us more about which of these views are and are not currently fashionable than about which are really the most preposterous!   (Lots of non-naturalist moral realists around today, for example, very few possible-world realists and external-world skeptics.)

A report from Australia about the bushfires ravaging the country

Michael Matthews, an Australian in Sydney and editor of the newsletter of The Society for the History and Philosophy of Science and Science Teaching, shares a personal account on p. 3 here.   (Thanks to Michael Ruse for the pointer.)

Rousseau on impeachment...

...with some help from David Lay Williams (DePaul).

Jacobson from Michigan to Colorado/Boulder

Daniel Jacobson (ethics, metaethics, moral psychology, aesthetics, political philosophy), Professor of Philosophy at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, has accepted a senior offer from the Department of Philosophy at the University of Colorado, Boulder, where he will hold the first endowed chair (the Benson Professorship) in that department beginning fall 2020.  In addition, he will serve as Director of the Benson Center for the Study of Western Civilization for at least the next four years (he takes over from philosopher Robert Pasnau).   That's a big catch for Colorado, which will be an even stronger choice in value theory going forward.

(Thanks to Bob Pasnau and Matthias Steup for the details.)

Great moments in obscure rock 'n' roll: The Factory, "Gone," 1968

British psychedelic band that released two singles and enjoyed no recognition at the time; this is the B-side of one of the two singles (which I rather prefer to the A-side, "Path Through the Forest"):

 

Which currently fashionable philosophical view is the most preposterous?

Regarding my quip about panpsychism the other day, philosopher Mohan Matthen (Toronto) writes: "Goff anticipates your objection, which is the first listed in his SEP entry, under the title, 'Objections to Panpsychism: The Incredulous Stare.' I happen to think that the Incredulous Stare holds water though, because it’s beyond crazy to argue a priori for a contingent proposition, and beyond even that to argue that panpsychism is necessary."

"Beyond crazy" usually doesn't slow philosophers down, especially in the modern academy, where there are professional incentives to make sure every possible position in logical space is occupied.  The only way to settle this matter is with a poll, of course.  So please rank order these philosophical positions from most to least preposterous.

UPDATE:  Philosopher Michael Strevens (NYU) writes:   "I think that panpsychism is likely to come out looking much better if you let everything vote, not just people."   Good point!  Same goes for letting possible people in other possible worlds vote!

Speaking of people defamed by the media, let's not forget the horrendous treatment of Yale PhD student Sarah Braasch

We've noted before the raw deal Ms. Braasch got in the media in the misnamed "Napping while Black" story.  Particularly striking is that her exoneration by Yale from the charges of racially motivated harassment received almost no media coverage, even though the whole alleged story was supposed to be about racially motivated harassment and calling of the police.  As law professor Michael Simkovic put it, in writing about the Lessig defamation lawsuit against the NYT:

[T]he cartoonish fictionalized version of reality that some newspapers attempt to pass off as critical information is in reality little more than a sadistic form of entertainment--character assassination as sport. Worse than entertainment which acknowledges that it is fictional, exaggerated "news" uses real people as its sensationalized villains and callously hurts them in the process.

That is exactly what happened to Ms. Braasch.

Harvard Law professor Larry Lessig sues NYT for defamation

Good for him.   Given the terrible state of American law--which is more favorable to defamers than any other legal jurisdiction in a democratic society--he will have an uphill battle.

Panpsychism makes "Scientific American"!

What's next, intelligent design?  (OK, bad joke.)

(Thanks to Phil Gasper for the pointer.)

Richard Marshall interviews Michael Della Rocca (Yale)...

...at 3:16 AM.  

Six philosophers win NEH Fellowships

They are:  Dorit Bar-On (Connecticut), Michael Jacovides (Purdue), Allison Kuklok (St. Michael's College), Gabriel Mendlow (Michigan [primary appointment in the law school]), Nathanael Stein (Florida State), and David Stern (Iowa).  A good year for philosophers in the NEH competition!

"Diversity blather" originated in corporate America, and its leading proponents are members of the managerial class in academia

Prior to Bakke and the constitutionalization of "diversity" blather in the late 1970s, people knew what affirmative action was actually about:   a kind of reparations for the world-historic injustices suffered by African-Americans, for example.   "Diversity" was cooked up in corporate HR departments in the 1970s, and then declared the sole permissible rationale for affirmative action in college admissions by Justice Powell of the Supreme Court.   These facts probably do have something to do with the kind of grading rubric for the illegal "diversity statements" that Berkeley has proposed.   A graduate student elsewhere, seeing the connection, writes:

Leaving aside the many legitimate worries that required diversity statements raise: I have been active in the graduate employee union during my time in my PhD program. Many schools emphasize that diversity statements should mention volunteer work done in the name of diversity. And my own union has done remarkable work in this area. Just a couple brief examples: we have fought administrative efforts to lower or eliminate tuition waivers, which have a disproportionate effect on underrepresented groups being able to attend grad school; we have made progress in child care provisions and nursing provisions, both of which disproportionately help women, who are chronically underrepresented in many programs; and, by gaining wage increases, we have disproportionately benefited international students who, as they are on student visas, cannot work jobs over the summers. And yet, I know that many of those administrators who impose the diversity statement requirement would be unhappy to read that I was active in the union. Increased wages, strong bargaining units, solidarity between various interest groups within the academic community: these are not the sorts of action admins are interested in, as they (correctly) view them as a threat to their excessive power. Hence, I haven't been mentioning my significant amount of activism, because I know it's not the sort of activism that is really desired. This should give progressive advocates of diversity statements pause. After all, diversity statements generally read like the sorts of things corporate lackeys at Wal-Mart, Coca-Cola, Starbucks, and Bank of America could get behind. And this should give the lie to the idea that these diversity statements are anything other than ideological cover for the professional-managerial class.

Philosophy, logic and clear thinking

Timothy Williamson is in favor!

In Memoriam: Roger Scruton (1944-2020)

MOVING TO FRONT FROM JANUARY 12--UPDATED

Professor Scruton, who taught for two decades at Birkbeck College, University of London, has died of cancer.  He did important work in aesthetics, but became better known as the philosopher of the Tories in the UK over the past thirty years.  There is an announcement at his website (it takes awhile to load), while The Guardian news item is here (a proper obituary is forthcoming).

ADDENDUM:  Professor Scruton published these reflections about 2019 (including the discovery of his cancer) last month.

UPDATE:  Here is the proper obituary from Jane O'Grady at The Guardian.  And here is another one from the BBC. (Thanks to Phil Gasper for the pointer to the latter.)

Top 50 Universities by membership in the American Academy of Arts & Sciences, 2019

The AAAS website has finally added a better search engine (see an earlier iteration of this study before the new search engine), although it is not ideally precise so some results had to be tabulated manually (e.g., "New York University" turns up also members at the "City University of New York").  

An * indicates the university has no medical school, which is important, since there are a couple of sections of the AAAS dominated by medical school faculty.

1.    Harvard University (448)

2.    Stanford University (279)

3.    *University of California, Berkeley (225)

4.    *Massachusetts Institute of Technology (214)

5.    University of Chicago (187)

6.    *Princeton University (184)

7.    Yale University (175)

8.    Columbia University (171)

9.    New York University (135)

10.    University of California, Los Angeles (105)

11.    Cornell University (86)

12.    Northwestern University (84)

13.    University of Michigan, Ann Arbor (82)

14.    *California Institute of Technology (78)

15.    University of California, San Diego (76)

16.    University of Pennsylvania (74)

17.    University of California, San Francisco (64) (purely a medical/health disciplines campus)

18.    University of Wisconsin, Madison (63)

19.    Duke University (57)

20.    Johns Hopkins University (55)

21.    University of Washington, Seattle (52)

22.    University of Virginia (40)

23.    Brown University (37)

23.    University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign (37) (relatively new medical school)

25.    University of California, Irvine (34)

25.    University of Texas, Austin (34) (relatively new medical school)

Oxford physicist wins age discrimination lawsuit against university...

MOVING TO FRONT FROM JANUARY 6--SOME INTERESTING COMMENTS (MORE WELCOME)

...before an employment tribunal.  Oxford is still enforcing mandatory retirement at 67 on almost all faculty.  Does anyone know what precedential value, if any, this decision has?  Will other faculty have to challenge this on an individual basis?  (I gather Oxford has lost other such cases recently.)   Comments from readers knowledgeable about English law welcome.

Papers posted on-line in 2019

For those interested, here are links to the new and revised papers I posted on-line in 2019:

"The History of Philosophy Reveals that 'Great' Philosophy is Disguised Moral Advocacy:  A Nietzschean Case Against the Socratic Canon in Philosophy"

"Culture and Value in Nietzsche"

"Nietzsche's Naturalism:  Neither Liberal Nor Illiberal"

"Bernard Williams' Debt to Nietzsche: Real or Illusory?"

"Foucault as a Kind of Realist:  Genealogical Critique and the Debunking of the Human Sciences"

"Marx and Marxism" (with Lawrence Dallman)

"Legal Positivism as a Realist Theory of Law"

"Human and Animal Minds"

Philosopher Peter Carruthers (Maryland) is blogging at the Brains Blog this week.

In Memoriam: Douglas N. Walton (1942-2020)

Professor Walton was best-known for his work in informal logic, especially the theory of argumentation.  He spent most of his career at the University of Winnipeg, although taught most recently at the University of Windsor.  The Windsor memorial notice is here.

(Thanks to Scott Wisdom for the pointer.)

What is a realist theory of law?

This programmatic essay, which was written for translation into Portuguese and Spanish for legal philosophy journals in South America, may be of interest to some readers.

The legacy of the Texas Taliban in school textbooks

On display in the NYT.

2019 in review, for those who missed it (the review, that is, not the year!)

As traffic picks up post-holidays, I thought I'd note that under the category "Year in Review" (in which this post appears), you can find links to the various year-in-review posts covering 2019 at the blog.

 

In Memoriam: Brian McGuinness (1927-2019)

MOVING TO FRONT FROM DECEMBER 24, 2019--UPDATED

Best-known for his work on Wittgenstein, Professor McGuinness taught for many years at Oxford University and then later at the University of Siena in Italy.  I will add links to memorial notices as they appear.

UPDATE:  An obituary from The Telegraph and another from the Austrian Wittgenstein Society.  (Thanks to Josef Mitterer for the pointers.)

Great moments in obscure rock 'n' roll: Spice, "Astranaza," 1968

Before Uriah Heep and Ken Hensley, vocalist David Bryon and guitarist Mick Box played with a band called Spice, which recorded more material than it released, including this quirky tune that grows on you:

 

Best introductory texts in philosophy of language?

MOVING TO FRONT FROM JANUARY 7--MORE COMMENTS WELCOME

Continuing with our new series about the best introductory texts in various areas of philosophy, I now invite readers to name what they think are the best introductory texts in philosophy of language. As before, don't just name a text, but say something about why you think it's particularly notable or valuable.  Although you don't have to sign  your comment, I do think signed ones will carry more weight with readers.

In Memoriam: David Efird (1974-2020)

I'm especially sorry to report the untimely death of Dr. Efird, a philosopher of religion and Anglican priest, who had taught philosophy at the University of York for nearly twenty years.  I will post links to memorial notices as they appear.

In Memoriam: Colin Howson (1945-2020)

A well-known philosopher of science and decision theorist, Professor Howson spent some four decades on the faculty at the London School of Economics.  There is a brief memorial notice from the LSE Department here.

This sums up the latest melodrama involving the social parasites known as "the Royal Family"

Pretty funny too.

Crispin Sartwell (Dickinson) on "guilt-by-association" and the Twitter Red Guard

This is funny; an excerpt:

Last week, I published a piece on the website Quillette. Founded by Aussie Claire Lehmann, Quillette has frequently been associated with the “Intellectual Dark Web” (IDW). It’s not left-leaning, though if you rummage around you’ll find pieces from a number of different orientations. They’ve sparked controversy here and there: on James Damore’s once-infamous Google memo, for example. They’re pretty obsessed with attacks by the woken on free speech on campus. And the sort of reaction they’ve provoked often provides excellent examples of the intolerance they condemn....

I was surprised by the responses I got on Twitter and in a number of emails. Almost nobody wrestled with my argument; rather, they focused on the sheer fact that it was in Quillette. Actual philosophy professors seemed to argue that where it was published showed it was false, or that it doesn’t at all matter whether it is, just that it was published in Quillette and hence associates me with people they repudiate, and thus refutes my reasoning and my very person.

“Crispin,” wrote @nathanoseroff, “not a good look to publish on the pro-eugenics, pro-‘culture war’, anti-trans website started by a far-right explicitly anti-feminist Australian that previously worked for The Blaze, a Canadian anti-Muslim disinformation website.” In the course of our discussion, he added, “Guess a website dedicated to mainstreaming eugenics doesn’t cross the line.” What he objects to, he said in the subsequent discussion, is “mostly the explicit pro-eugenics propaganda, really.” I tried to get Nathan to show me the pro-eugenics editorials, but to do that would force him to link stuff that he repudiates, and that was a non-starter. Googling “quillette eugenics” produced only a review that presupposed that eugenics was wrong and disgusting.

Another entry for the Black Book of capitalism...

...rising deaths by suicide and substance abuse in the working class.   As this account appears in the NYT, no discussion of actual causes and effects is permitted, thus we find this:

We have deep structural problems that have been a half century in the making, under both political parties, and that are often transmitted from generation to generation. Only in America has life expectancy now fallen three years in a row, for the first time in a century, because of “deaths of despair.”

But that's because "both political parties" have been operating in the shadow of the Reagan Revolution from the neoliberal right that began in 1980, and that has gradually destroyed the FDR Presidency (and its consensus shared by both parties) that lasted from 1933 until 1980.  In 2016, we had the first real challenge to the neoliberal consensus in Bernie Sanders's candidacy for the Presidential nomination.  The future of this benighted country will depend upon whether Reagan's long reign is finally brought to an end.

JHP Article Prize for 2019

Philosopher Jack Zupko (Alberta), editor of the Journal of History of Philosophy, shared the following:

The Board of Directors of the Journal of the History of Philosophy has awarded the prize for the best article to appear in volume 57 of the JHP to Jessica Moss and Whitney Schwab for “The Birth of Belief,” JHP 57.1 (January 2019): 1–32, with an Honorable Mention going to Jon McGinnis for "A Continuation of Atomism: Shahrastānī on the Atom and Continuity," JHP 57.4 (October 2019): 595-619.

Jessica is Professor of Philosophy at New York University and Whitney is Assistant Professor of Philosophy at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County; Jon is Professor of Classical and Medieval Philosophy at the University of Missouri, St. Louis.

Details here: https://sites.ualberta.ca/~jhphil/.

Summer school in philosophy at CEU Budapest

I usually don't announce these summer schools, but I'm making an exception for this one, led by Barry Loewer (Rutgers), given the unprecedented persecution of the CEU by the fascist Orban, wihch has forced the CEU to move its programs to Vienna.  But this summer school is in Budapest, focusing on the history and philosophy of scientific laws and probability, with a strong line-up of visiting speakers/teachers as well.  It's nice to see the Templeton Foundation funding this event, since CEU needs support from the international academic community.

A new "School of Liberal Arts" at U of Wollongong, led by philosopher Daniel Hutto

The program is described here--a kind of "great books," liberal arts education within a large public research university--and they have already made multiple junior appointments of philosophers working in philosophy of mind and psychology, philosophy of science, ethics, ancient philosophy, and phenomenology.   An impressive investment in philosophy and philosophical education!

John Dewey Center established in India

News release here.   Professor Scott Stroud (Communication Studies, UT Austin), who called this to my attention, writes:

Dewey’s student Bhimrao Ambedkar was a major figure in Indian politics, serving as the architect of India’s constitution, and he is also known as a major leader in the movement against caste oppression (he was from a so-called “untouchable” caste). I’m hopeful that this venture will increase discussion of Dewey, the nature of democracy, and education in India, as well as make U.S. academics more aware of philosophical traditions and syntheses in Indian history (such as Ambedkar’s form of pragmatism). 

Trump as symptom

This is very apt, from the platform of the Socialist Equality Party:

Though his bourgeois opponents portray him as a monster risen from hell, Trump—whose wealth is derived from decades of fraud in the financial, real estate, casino gambling and entertainment industries—is far better understood as the personification of the parasitism of the American ruling class and the criminality that pervades the operations of the entire system.

Stoicism as ideology

It makes its way to Silicon Valley.

(Thanks to David Zimmerman for the pointer.)

Richard Marshall interviews Robert A. Wilson (Western Australia)...

...at 3:16 AM.

Virtual Dissertation Groups, once again

Joshua Smart (Ohio State) asked me to share this, which I'm happy to do:

Virtual Dissertation Groups

VDG is a free service that connects graduate students to provide feedback on dissertation work. Members are grouped with two others working in the same general area of philosophy. About once a month, one member sends some work (3-6K words) to the others, who return feedback and comments in a week or so.

While advisors and committees are important, it can be incredibly helpful to discuss one’s work with peers in a lower-stakes environment, and it can be particularly enlightening to do so with those who take a different approach, outlook, or focus. Not only that, but there is evidence from psychological research that thinking about problems in relation to persons who are geographically distant can increase creativity. With students in programs from many states, countries, and every continent with a philosophy Ph.D. program, Virtual Dissertation Groups is a great way to capture some of these benefits!

You can sign up to participate here. Open signups through Saturday, January 18th. [After this, new dissertators are accepted conditional on available spots]

More on the fascist attack on the universities in India

A propos this, a reader in India (who did not want to be named for the obvious reasons, given the fascist thugs roaming around) writes:

I’m writing with some more information on the follow-up of the attack on JNU which is about as outrageous as the incident itself. So far, two days after the attack, no person has been arrested in connection with the violence even though perpetrators have been publicly identified. Some of the perpetrators were seen carrying sticks that are police equipment. The police has, however, initiated proceedings against victims of the attack, ironically while the attacks were ongoing. The reason for this, and the reason for why the police did not intervene, seems obvious. The perpetrators belong to the ABVP, the student wing of the ruling BJP. Policing is in India the responsibility of individual states. Delhi has a special status (somewhat like the District of Columbia) where the police is under the power of the federal government, i.e. under Home Minister Amit Shah. Shah is also BJP President and notorious for calling suspected Muslim migrants “termites” and has a history of defaming JNU as “anti-national” or “anti-India”. This also explains why the Delhi Police never intervened in the violence at JNU even though the same Delhi Police used excessive violence against anti-government protesters at Jamia Millia Islamia (including the use of tear gas inside the library!).

A short report on what has happened is published here: https://scroll.in/article/948999/the-daily-fix-delhi-polices-actions-in-jnu-attacks-show-incompetence-or-government-complicity

Two senior term appointments for Rutgers: Antony (quarter-time) from U Mass/Amherst; Hausman from Wisconsin (UPDATED)

MOVING TO FRONT:  ANTONY PART-TIME APPOINTMENT CLARIFIED, BELOW

Louise Antony (philosophy of mind, feminist philosophy), Professor of Philosophy at the University of Massachussetts, Amherst, has accepted appointment as Distinguished Visiting Professor of Philosophy at Rutgers University, New Brunswick for (at least) the next five years, where she will teach a graduate seminar one semester per year (starting in 2020-21) (she will also continue teaching at U Mass/Amherst that term as well, so she is effectively still at least three-quarters of the time at U Mass).   In addition, Daniel Hausman (philosophy of social science, philosophy of economics, applied ethics) will retire from the University of Wisconsin at Madison and take up a six-year full-time position at Rutgers as Research Professor of Bioethics in the Rutgers Center for Population Level Bioethics, with a secondary appointment in Philosophy (also starting in 2020-21).   He will be teaching at least three graduate seminars in philosophy during this time, in addition to his teaching and supervision at the Center for Population Level Bioethics.

(Thanks to Phil Bricker for the clarifications.)

While "diversity statements" are being used system-wide in the University of California...

...we don't, at this stage, know whether all campuses are using them perniciously and illegally, as Berkeley and perhaps also Davis, and Santa Cruz are, in some significant number of their searches.  The potential for this misuse is there at all the campuses, of course, and it remains to be seen how things develop elsewhere.

Remember what's at issue here.  Berkeley has made the criteria for evaluating diversity statements public.   A job candidate will get a low score if he “defines diversity only in terms of different areas of study or different nationalities, but doesn't discuss gender or ethnicity/race” or if he “discount[s] the importance of diversity.”   As I noted in a prior CHE column, “diversity” was not the original (or even most plausible) rationale for affirmative action for African-Americans.  “Diversity” only took over our discourse when the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1978 Bakke case endorsed “diversity” over the more plausible justifications such as compensating the victims of race-based injustice by facilitating the social mobility of their descendants, and providing salient role models for racial minorities.  Almost all advocates of affirmative action prior to the Bakke case would have discounted “the importance of diversity” except perhaps with regard to “different areas of study"; those folks wouldn't make the cut at Berkeley these days!

ADDENDUM:   Even at Berkeley, not all department searches are--yet anyway--using the "diversity statement" for a first cut.  The same may also be true at Davis and Santa Cruz.

Living without smart phones

Students (prompted by their philosophy professor) write about their experience, and it's revealing.

(Thanks to Dean Rowan for the pointer.)

India fascism watch: masked thugs attack university students and faculty

Remarkable.

Sarah Braasch v. Yale, redux

Sarah Brasch is the Yale philosophy PhD student who was the victim of a media mobbing after being framed as a "racist."  In order to clear her name, Ms. Braasch is trying to force Yale to release the Yale police recording of what actually transpired that evening; Yale, inexplicably and outrageously, is refusing.   Here is the brief by Ms. Braasch's lawyers in support of her FOIA request:

Download 2020.01.03 Braasch Post Hearing Brief F

You can contribute to help Ms. Braasch with her growing legal expenses here.  Remember, she is up against Yale University!