The basic fact is this effort has nothing to do with "pluralism" so just drop it--call it the "Anti-PGR" or "A Guide to Other Parts of Philosophy" or, even better, just call it what it really is, namely, the SPEP/SAAP Guide to Graduate Programs in Philosophy. (And a note to others: just because the SPEP/SAAP folks want to misappropriate the positive valence of "pluralism" for their effort doesn't mean anyone in the philosophical community is thereby obligated to accede to that misuse of language: have some courage, folks, and refer to it as the "SPEP/SAAP Guide" or the "Pluralist [sic] Guide".)
Now the SPEP/SAAP label isn't quite right about the section on philosophy of race, which, as best I can assess, is the only part of the guide that could actually be recommended to a student otherwise utilizing the PGR (though with the caveat that it usually makes more sense to choose an otherwise strong program with one or two people in your definite area of interest, than to choose an otherwise weak program just because it has more faculty in your area--so, e.g., places like Harvard, Princeton, and MIT would be better bets than many, though not all, of the "strongly recommended" programs in terms of getting a good philosophical education and having prominent faculty working on philosophical issues related to race).
Finally, and most importantly, disentangle the project from the "Climate for Women" section, which is a fraud and a disgrace and seriously undermines the credibility of everything else. (For an overview of the problems, see here, here, here and here.)
ADDENDUM: Here's a perfect caveat for the "Climate for Women" section of the SPEP Guide, due to J.W. Showalter, in a comment here:
We are a purely self-selected, very probably non-representative group of people interested in which programs are the best for women in a number of vaguely-defined respects. Though our numbers are small, at least one among us has come to a consensus on which programs are relatively good. That consensus may or may not change, and that may or may not be reflected in later versions of this guide. But anyway, for what it's worth, this is pretty well what I or we came up with. Please don't take it too seriously: we didn't actually ask any of the people at many of the schools how they felt. But, if enough people are interested in getting a sense of how I and maybe some other people think about all this, this guide could be a wonderful starting-point to a superb conversation.
Joking aside, this section will hopefully be taken down soon, and those responsible will apologize to the community at large for their irresponsible behavior.
ANOTHER: As several readers have pointed out over the past few days, it would be nice if some of the philosophers who were allegedly surveyed for the "Climate for Women" guide, and who presumably did not anticipate the travesty it would turn into, will begin to speak out, either by e-mailing me or some of the other blogs that have been posting information about this affair. Knowing some of these philosophers, I am sure they did not realize how this would turn out, but now is the time to speak up.
Recent Comments