Leiter Reports: A Philosophy Blog

On being an attractive woman and being taken seriously in philosophy

A female graduate student writes:

I have recently found myself wondering about being a woman in philosophy who is feminine and sometimes perceived as attractive. As a teaching assistant, I have been hit on by undergraduate students. I once received uncomfortable emails from a student asking me on dates to the point where the instructor had to grade his work so that he did not have reasons to communicate with me. I have also been asked my credentials by male students on numerous occasions. Other male TAs I have consulted with do not share these experiences. After hearing my stories, one male TA remarked: "I'll keep my male privilege, thanks."

Another male colleague of mine was tremendously competitive with me while he was in graduate school. He was not competitive with other graduate students. He told me that a paper of mine (now published in a decent journal) reflects my immaturity, and that I received a higher grade than him in a seminar because the professor felt sorry for me. (I was sick near the end of the semester.) He also called me out for taking what he perceived as "female middle-ground positions," such as moderate foundationalism in an epistemology course, and raising too many feminist arguments--which did not, on his view, count as real philosophy.

It is possible that these examples are not connected to my being a woman in philosophy. But given that I have read and heard about other women sharing similar experiences, and have not read or heard about men facing similar experiences, I think it is reasonable to at least be suspicious about these connections.

I also use twitter to connect with philosophers around the world, and find it a generally supportive and stimulating space to communicate with like-minded people. But I received a troubling tweet in response to a (non-sexual) photo I posted recently. The tweet was by a male philosopher. He said that philosophers are not supposed to be pretty.

These experiences have made me wonder whether being perceived as pretty, to some, will also mean that I will be taken less seriously in philosophy. Clearly, the tweeter's comment was not well thought out. It was a tweet. But  do we still have distorted understandings about what philosophers are "supposed to be" or "supposed to look like"? 

And what about female philosophers who reject the false stereotypes that go along with "being feminist"? I am as committed to feminist philosophy as the next feminist philosopher, but I have long hair, and I care about fashion. I am professional, but I wear makeup and skirts. Because of this, I often feel out of place in philosophical circles where I feel as though my femininity removes me both from philosophy as a discipline, and from feminists as a group.

Ultimately, I am looking for advice from female philosophers about how to exist in a discipline that is still male-dominated, and how to embrace my femininity in ways that will not hurt my career.

Signed comments will be preferred, but any on-topic replies that include a valid e-mail address (which will not be published) will be approved.

Public school closings in Chicago as having human rights implications

I'm very pleased that one of my colleagues has taken the lead on this issue.

New Books in July

Authors and/or publishers kindly sent me these new books this month:

The Critical Imagination by James Grant (Oxford University Press, 2013).

Life, War, Earth:  Deleuze and the Sciences by John Protevi (University of Minnesota Press, 2013).

My Friendship with Martin Buber by Maurice Friedman (Syracuse University Press, 2013).

Emotion and Imagination by Adam Morton (Polity Press, 2013).

On Music by Theodore Gracyk (Routledge, 2013).

Virtue Ethics and Confucianism edited by Stephen C. Angle & Michael Slote (Routledge, 2013).

Arguing about Human Nature:  Contemporary Debates edited by Stephen M. Downes & Edouard Machery (Routledge, 2013).

Plotnius:  Ennead V.5:  That the Intelligbles are not External to the Intellect, and on the Good trans. & ed. by Lloyd Gerson (Parmenides Publishing, 2013).

U of Miami Vice-Provost Replies to the Open Letter from Philosophers Elsewhere

The Vice-Provost's reply is here; the letter to which he replies can be found via the link here.

Philosophy majors and the GRE...

...some recent results.

(Thanks to Myron Penner for the pointer.)

PhD as a series of articles, rather than a traditional thesis

A graduate student writes:

What are the advantages and disadvantages of doing a PhD 'by published/publishable papers'? An obvious answer might be: "The crucial advantage is having published articles, or articles that are immediately ready to submit to journals." But someone who completes a traditional PhD dissertation can publish during candidature as well. So, I'm curious if there are any further advantages or disadvantages of the 'by publication' route? It might be most helpful to know what people on hiring committees think (even if there may be considerations that members of a hiring committee wouldn't consider relevant when evaluating a job candidate). 

Thoughts from readers?  Signed comments preferred.

More on Larry Summers's disgraceful track record

Here.

"Unreliable" philosophers

An untenured philosopher writes:

I was wondering if I could solicit an opinion from you and/or your readers.

In my short career thus far, I have encountered a surprising number of philosophers who are "unreliable," one might say. I am not even referring to dubious behavior from journals. I'm talking about individuals who agree to read a draft, and then never do. I'm talking about carefully crafted emails being ignored. I'm talking about people who say they will recommend or campaign for you heartily, but then become coy when it matters. This is not just with senior faculty--I've been treated this way by folks at my own rank. (I don't believe I'm prone to offend people...)

So one question is whether such behavior is generally tolerated/accepted, as part of the culture of the discipline.

But more importantly, how can one respond to someone non-responsive?

Since I am at my most professionally vulnerable stage, I can hardly afford to upset anyone. The main alternatives, it seems, are to sound whining or annoying--or to just keep quiet. None of these seem very good options.

I am inclined to think "just keep quiet" is the only option--that, and make a note about who is reliable and who isn't.  One can't generally force people to honor their representations or to be responsive, even when an e-mail has been "carefully crafted."  Of course, if the philosopher is someone with whom you have a substantial relationship (say, a dissertation adviser, a longtime mentor, etc.), then reminders would be appropriate.  What do readers think? Signed comments preferred, but all comments must include a valid e-mail address, which will not appear.

Zangwill from Durham to Hull

Nick Zangwill (ethics, aesthetics), Professor of Philosophy at the University of Durham, has accepted the Ferrens Chair in Philosophy at the University of Hull, effective 2013-14. 

Against charity

I suppose The New York Times would not have printed this except for who the author is.  If he believes what he's written, I trust he will allocate his Foundation's resources to radical political parties.  (The increasing number of philosophers who seem to think charitable giving is an ethical imperative would do well to contemplate the issues raised by Mr. Buffett.)

UPDATE:  A very apt comment on the piece by Dan Kervick:

A system in which liberals tolerate massive inequality, exploitation and structural dysfunction on the one hand, and then lobby rich people to "give back" in various ways - creative and sometimes effective though those give-backs might be - is an embrace of injustice and the prerogatives of power, not a challenge to it. Charity-state liberalism and the cult of philanthropy are neoliberal capitalism's way of defending itself against structural change while buying indulgences for its sins.

Philosopher Andrew Levine on Obama's Legacy

Here.

In Memoriam: Arthur Szathmary (1916-2013)

A longtime member of the Princeton faculty (from which he retired in 1986), Professor Szathmary specialized in aesthetics.  The Princeton memorial notice is here.

Barnard's Taylor Carman interviewed...

...at 3AM.

Larry Summers' Mismanagement of Harvard

This is interesting.

"Nietzsche" for the Oxford Handbook of 19th-Century Philosophy

MOVING TO FRONT FROM YESTERDAY--SSRN SITE WAS DOWN FOR AWHILE, BUT IS NOW WORKING AGAIN

This is the revised (and penultimate, subject to copyediting) version of an essay which attempts in 11,000 words to give an overview of the main themes of Nietzsche's philosophical corpus.  For those who have read my other work on Nietzsche (including what's on SSRN), there won't be much new here, but hopefully philosophers with a side-interest in Nietzsche will find this a useful resource, with a lot of pointers to other philosophically-minded secondary literature.

Memorial for Joe Camp at Pitt in September

Another memorial conference announcement from Pitt:

The Philosophy Department at the University of Pittsburgh will be hosting a memorial gathering on Friday September 20th in honor of our former colleague Joe Camp.  We invite you to join us in our remembrance and celebration of the many ways in which, as friend, colleague, and mentor, Joe touched and enriched our lives.  A preliminary draft of the program is attached.

We will be pleased to offer food and beverages on the day of the gathering (as indicated on the program), if you contact Collie Henderson ([email protected]) to let us know that you plan to attend.  Also, please alert Collie to any dietary restrictions (vegetarian, vegan, etc.) that may apply.  We are also reserving a block of rooms at the Wyndham Pittsburgh University Center (formerly the Holiday Inn).  The number is 412-682-6200.  When you reserve your room, please mention that you are visiting for the Joseph Camp Memorial Conference, to ensure billing at the University rate.

We hope that you will be able to join us for this occasion and look forward to seeing you in September.

Missouri/St. Louis's Berit Brogaard profiled...

...here.  (Scroll down a couple of pages.)

More triumphs of the "humanitarian" war in Iraq

Impressive!  No doubt apologists for these atrocities like Norman Geras will comment.

In Memoriam: Fred Dretske (1932-2013)

I'm sorry to report that Professor Dretske has passed away.  Most recently, he was a Senior Research Scholar in Philosophy at Duke University, and before that he taught for many years at the University of Wisconsin at Madison, and then at Stanford University.  He made many well-known contributions to epistemology and the philosophy of mind over the past half-century.  I will link to memorial notices when they appear.  Professor Dretske had requested that there be neither a funeral nor a memorial service.

UPDATE:  Here's a recent short piece by Dretske on what we should learn from the Gettier cases.

UPDATE:  A short memorial notice.

ANOTHER:  An obituary from The Guardian.

TAing...for other graduate students?

A new philosophy graduate student writes:

In a PhD program, how common is it for grad students to TA for other, current grad students? It immediately strikes me as awkward, but I am unfamiliar with the common practice. If you have any insight into this, or would care to ask your readers, it would be greatly appreciated.

Readers?

UCSD's Patricia Churchland talks about her new book...

...on NPR.

(Thanks to Clifford Sosis for the pointer.)

Maibom from Carleton to Cincinnati

Heidi Maibom (philosophy of mind, psychology & cognitive science; moral psychology), Associate Professor of Philosophy at Carleton University, has accepted a senior offer from the Department of Philosophy at the University of Cincinnati, to begin in Spring 2014.  This is the second senior hire for Cincinnati in roughly the last year.

Annette Baier Memorial Conference at Pitt in October

From the Department at Pitt:

The Philosophy Department at the University of Pittsburgh will be hosting a one-day memorial conference on Saturday October 12th in honor of our former colleague Annette Baier.  We invite you to join us in our remembrance and celebration of the many ways in which, as friend, colleague, and mentor, Annette touched and enriched our lives.  A preliminary draft of the conference program is attached.

We will be pleased to offer food and beverages on the day of the conference, if you contact Collie Henderson ([email protected]) to let us know that you plan to attend.  Also, please alert Collie to any dietary restrictions (vegetarian, vegan, etc.) that may apply.  We are also reserving a block of rooms at the Wyndham Pittsburgh University Center (formerly the Holiday Inn).  The number is 412-682-6200.  When you reserve your room, please mention that you are visiting for the Annette Baier memorial conference, to ensure billing at the University rate.

The full program is below the fold.

"Encyclopedia of Ethical Failure"

It has been produced, without irony, by the U.S. Department of Defense (what used to be called, in the good 'ole days, the Department of War).  No entry for "war of aggression," alas.

(Thanks to Dean Rowan for the pointer.)

More on the economic value of a law degree

The paper co-authored by law professor Michael Simkovic has had every blowhard and know-nothing in cyberspace frothing at the mouth for the last week; he has a sharp series of replies here.  The Dunning-Kruger Effect lives!

Philosophical pop song

With a cameo by Nietzsche even.

(Thanks to David Livingstone Smith fror the pointer.)

Are top journals hostile to formal and/or experimental work?

A young philosopher writes:

I have heard some more senior philosophers say that the best philosophy journals are less likely to publish papers that have experimental content, less likely to publish papers that have formal content, and much less likely to publish papers that have both experimental and formal content. I'm not sure what to make of this sentiment. Are the top four or five general-interest philosophy journals really less likely to publish papers with experimental and/or formal content? (I am especially interested to know if people think that this is true about the Philosophical Review, since that journal is clearly in a class by itself in terms of reputation in the discipline.) If so, why isn't that a big black mark against those journals?

I'll note that PPR has published a lot of experimental philosophy, as well as important critiques of Xphil.  But I've opened comments for other opinions.  If your comment mentions a journal by name, you will have to include a full name in the signature line; all comments must include a valid e-mail address, which will not appear.

"Social Theory Through Complaining"

A required course!

Isaiah Berlin's letters, 1960-1975...

...the short version.

(Thanks to Michael Weisberg for the pointer.)

An apt and hard-hitting essay on women's healthcare...

...and the Texas Repugs.

Another reply to the open letter from faculty elsewhere

Professor McGinn has posted this reply, which makes some fair points (amidst some rhetorical excess of its own) that go to respects in which that letter was not well-drafted.  I do think the author is mistaken, however, on the retaliation issue:  in fact, the university has a legal obligation to defend a complainant in a case like this from retaliation.  Whether any of Professor McGinn's blog postings constitute illegal retaliation is a harder question (some plainly do not, others I am less sure), but it is fair to ask the university to look into it, just as it is fair to ask the university to protect the student's privacy rights under FERPA.  That Professor McGinn has not disclosed the identity of the complainant does not settle the retaliation question. 

Duke's Alex Rosenberg interviewed...

...at 3AM.

A pretty good statement by Obama on the Trayvon Martin case...

...here.  Almost enough to make you forget that he's a serial violator of civil rights, who has laid the foundation for the fascist state of tomorrow!  Almost.

An open letter of support from faculty and students at the University of Miami

Prior to yesterday's open letter from faculty elsewhere, faculty and students at the University of Miami sent me their own letter in support of the student complainant in the McGinn case, and asked me to share it with the professional community.  Here it is:

An open letter of support and solidarity from members of the Department of Philosophy at University of Miami

The recent resignation of faculty member Colin McGinn has received a fair amount of attention within the discipline and beyond.  As members of the University of Miami’s Department of Philosophy (including graduate students, alumni from the past three years, and faculty), we wish to come forward with a show of support for the graduate student who filed the initial complaint, and for the University’s handling of the situation. To our knowledge the graduate student in question acted in good faith and demonstrated bravery and care, not only for herself but also for others. Any attempts to impugn her character, philosophical ability, or motivations are entirely without merit and deserve categorical condemnation.

Universities have procedures and protocols in place for receiving the complaints of students in order to protect the rights and interests of those who are vulnerable. We have every reason to believe that the University of Miami investigated the matter in question carefully and judiciously. We urge those without access to all relevant details to show caution in speculating upon the situation.

As members of this department, we take the matter very seriously and support our colleague who filed the complaint. Whether or not any given complaint has merit is for the University to decide. But no student who files a complaint, regardless of whether the complaint is judged to be with merit or not, deserves retaliation and intimidation.  Such behavior serves to silence others who would come forward, and undermines the policies and procedures the University of Miami has in place to protect individuals with limited power to protect themselves.

We stand in solidarity with the student in question. We can attest to her good character and superior philosophical abilities. We are proud to work alongside her and strongly condemn any attempt to cast aspersions on her character and abilities. Although these events have been difficult for all of us we are focusing on the silver lining: a necessary conversation has risen up around these events, and through that conversation we have the opportunity to improve the academic environment – not just here in Miami but in all philosophy departments.  

We carefully considered whether we should sign our names to this letter or take a collective, yet anonymous, stand. We have chosen the latter.  We did not want to pressure anyone into taking unknown risks, or cause unnecessary tension in our department. This was a difficult decision to reach, but our overarching interest is in supporting our colleague. Also, given the sensitivity of the issue and it being summer we were not able to contact every department member. As of now, 34 members of the University of Miami philosophy department  (including graduate students/recently graduated students and faculty) have expressed their support of the contents of this letter, representing a clear majority from each of those groups. 

It is my understanding that the 34 signatories do represent very substantial majorities of all groups, both the faculty and the PhD students, as well as a smaller number of recent alumni.

"Ebola could lead to death, sometimes fatal"...

...and other student writing gems.

Philosophers call on University of Miami to defend the student in the McGinn case

 Here.  

I should disclose that I declined to sign the letter (as did my colleague Martha Nussbaum), but not because of lack of sympathy with its basic point.  (I now speak for myself, not Martha, though I believe she shares some of these concerns.)  I think the letter is too vague about what it asks, and is mistaken in invoking an alleged "free speech" right of Professor McGinn.   There is no "free speech" right to defame accusers, to violate student privacy, or to engage in retaliation against a complainant in a sexual harassment matter.  (That the university, according to Professor McGinn, did not bring a sexual harassment charge against him is neither here nor there, for reasons I will return to.)  Professor McGinn's blog postings over the last month have raised these and other issues.  It is my impression that the university has acted to check his violation of FERPA (the federal law that protects student privacy) given what he has deleted from his blog. 

I said originally that I thought the material in the public record (i.e., the original CHE article) indicated that disciplinary action was warranted against Professor McGinn, though not necessarily termination.  Although Professor McGinn has denied using the word "masturbate" in correspondence with the student, his other admissions since then--particularly here and here--make clear that (1) he sent some number of e-mails with what he deemed to be humourous sexual content (innuendo, etc.) to one of his students, and (2) he cultivated a relationship with the student, one so intimate and unusual (based on "taboo-busting")--though non-sexual on his account--that "it was explicitly agreed between us that if anything in our relationship was felt to be unacceptable it could be stopped simply by saying so."  (I have never in twenty years heard of a teacher-student relationship like this.)  These admissions, alone--without anything else--would be sufficient to trigger disciplinary action in my judgment, and that is without even taking into account the other serious allegations of sexual harassment that have surfaced.  It is not sufficient that the sender of sexual messages, for example, thought them humorous and thought they were so received.  McGinn's analogy to those working in the glass factory also does not help:  the co-worker subjected to the "blow job" jokes would also have a legal cause of action for sexual harassment.  (That the University did not, according to McGinn, raise "sexual harassment" as an issue in securing his resignation from a tenured position is not very interesting; as a procedural matter, the University's interest was in sanctioning misconduct, what the misconduct was labelled is of no consequence, as every criminal lawyer knows.)

When CHE asked McGinn to disclose the harassing e-mails that were allegedly sent, he declined.  Subsequently on his blog, he posted what he claimed were friendly e-mails from the victim of his harassment (he has since removed them, I assume because of FERPA issues--there was no context to the e-mails I should add).  I think the University of Miami has an obligation (1) to monitor violations of FERPA carefully, and (2) insure that a complainant in what appears to be a sexual harassment matter is not subject to retaliation in violation of the law or university rules.

UPDATE:  Professor McGinn replies to the letter here and here.

Big year for philosophers at the British Academy

Four have been elected as Fellows:  the new regular Fellows are John Gardner, the Professor of Jurisprudence at Oxford, and John Hawthorne, the Waynflete Professor of Metaphysical Philosophy, also at Oxford (Hawthorne is also a part-time Professor of Philosophy at the University of Southern California); the two new Corresponding Fellows are Philip Pettit (Princeton/ANU) and Robert Stalnaker (MIT, where he is on phased retirement, while also being a regular half-time visitor at Columbia).  In addition, the political theorist Cecile Laborde at UCL was also elected a Fellow.

Solnit on Snowden

This is a good read.

The case of Frank Richter and the peculiarities of the German academic system

Frank Richter, a highly-regarded computational linguist at the University of Tuebingen, is at risk of losing his job.  Why?  Because, like large numbers of middle-rank (non-professorial) academics in Germany, his "time is up."  Marion Zepf, a student at Tuebingen, writes:

Frank Richter, an outstanding, internationally renowned researcher in computational linguistics and an excellent lecturer, is about to lose his job at the University of Tuebingen, Germany.  This is by no fault on his part, but by federal law - and Frank is by far not the only academic in Germany who has to leave the academic world despite his good work.

In Germany, 85% of middle-rank (i.e. non-professorial) academics are employed under fixed-term contracts.  These contracts are usually extended and chained, up to a limit of twelve years, which is mandated by a federal law (called 'Wissenschaftszeitvertragsgesetz').  After that time, the researcher may no longer sign a fixed-term contract at any German University.  The only way to stay in academia is to be appointed to a chair - an option that covers only 10% of middle-rank academics, - or to obtain one of the very few other unlimited-term positions.  The latter case is extremely rare, as there are not nearly enough such positions available to employ even just the best researchers.  Thus, the law has the effect of an academic employment ban for Frank and many others who are not lucky enough to receive an unlimited-term contract.

There is a petition in support of Dr. Richter here.  (If you do not read German, there is an English translation of the petition here.) 

Breaking news: philosophical researchers find that Sean Hannity "not even in the business of describing reality"

Here.

Beautiful libraries

Nice set of photos, including lots of university and college libraries from around the world including Washington/Seattle, UC San Diego, the Sorbonne,  Oxford, Chicago, Vassar, and many others.

Former Indiana Governor Daniels (now President of Purdue) wanted to suppress politically unpalatable speech

Pretty appalling.  One wonders how many other Governors "behind closed doors" have tired the same?

UPDATE:  Dean Rowan calls to my attention Daniels's response.  Well, that's a relief:  he was only trying to micro-manage the pre-college curriculum with an eye to his version of political correctness.

The economic value of a law degree

There's a new and well-done paper by a law professor and economist which might interest some readers; predictably it's already being trashed by those who didn't even bother to read it.

More on gendered intuitions in philosophy

Here.

Silicon Valley is now the Dunning-Kruger Effect capital of America...

...and this blog makes fun of them (and it's pretty funny).

(Thanks to Dean Rowan for the pointer.)

Birmingham's Lisa Bortolotti featured...

...at Brains blog.

"Beyond Blame"...

...at the Boston Review.  A lead essay by law professor Barbara Fried (Stanford), with whole bunch of replies, including several from philosophers (Christine Korsgaard and T.M. Scanlon [both Harvard], Erin Kelly [Tufts], George Sher [Rice], Gideon Rosen [Princeton], and me).

Here's a straightforward explanation of how the Florida legislature made the acquittal of George Zimmerman (and no doubt others) possible

Here.  But for this heinously stupid "Stand Your Ground" law, it is hard to imagine that Zimmerman would have walked away on both the murder and manslaughter charges.

Another interesting perspective on Mr. Zimmerman is here.

Best Wellington-area tours...

...for my kids, who are "Lord of the Rings" fans.  We'd like to see the landscapes, not the movie studios.  Recommendations gratefully received here or via e-mail.  Thanks.

ADDENDUM:  After Wellington, we fly to Queenstown, then drive on to Fiordland and then from there to Dunedin.  Any advice for the South Island welcome too!

Greenwald interviewed on Snowden, NSA spying etc...

...by Hampshire philosopher Falguni Sheth.

(Thanks to Peter Ludlow for the pointer.)