Leiter Reports: A Philosophy Blog

Simpson on extreme altruists

Philosopher Robert Mark Simpson (Monash) has done a very illuminating review of two recent books of interest to moral philosophers.  It's also a model of review writing, fair and informative, and written with style and insight.

Moral robots?

They're coming.  But will they act for the right kinds of reasons, asks the Kantian?  One doubts it!

More on police killings

Following up on yesterday's post, a few more related items:

1.  The Dallas police chief is, I take it, trying to express some of the relevant points.

2.  The New York Times reports on new research by an economist that shows force is used more often against blacks than whites, but that there is no racial disparity in shootings by police.  Nothing, alas, about class in this study.  (Thanks to Jordan Rosen for the pointer.)

3.  Philosopher David Austin (North Carolina State) calls my attention to an article that does look at the class angle (I've bolded that bit):

Cody T. Ross, "A Multi-Level Bayesian Analysis of Racial Bias in Police Shootings at the County-Level in the United States, 2011–2014. PLoS ONE 10(11): e0141854. doi:10.1371/journal. pone.0141854 http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0141854 [with methods and data Supplement]

Abstract: A geographically-resolved, multi-level Bayesian model is used to analyze the data presented in the U.S. Police-Shooting Database (USPSD) in order to investigate the extent of racial bias in the shooting of American civilians by police officers in recent years. In contrast to previous work that relied on the FBI’s Supplemental Homicide Reports that were constructed from self-reported cases of police-involved homicide, this data set is less likely to be biased by police reporting practices. County-specific relative risk outcomes of being shot by police are estimated as a function of the interaction of: 1) whether suspects/civilians were armed or unarmed, and 2) the race/ethnicity of the suspects/civilians. The results provide evidence of a significant bias in the killing of unarmed black Americans relative to unarmed white Americans, in that the probability of being {black, unarmed, and shot by police} is about 3.49 times the probability of being {white, unarmed, and shot by police} on average. Furthermore, the results of multi-level modeling show that there exists significant heterogeneity across counties in the extent of racial bias in police shootings, with some counties showing relative risk ratios of 20 to 1 or more. Finally, analysis of police shooting data as a function of county-level predictors suggests that racial bias in police shootings is most likely to emerge in police departments in larger metropolitan counties with low median incomes and a sizable portion of black residents, especially when there is high financial inequality in that county. There is no relationship between county-level racial bias in police shootings and crime rates (even race-specific crime rates), meaning that the racial bias observed in police shootings in this data set is not explainable as a response to local-level crime rates.

To avoid sexual harassment and other unprofessional conduct, philosophy departments cut back on alcohol-infused socializing

Robin Wilson, a reporter at CHE who has covered academic philosophy quite a bit, kindly sent along a link to her latest article looking at the philosophy profession (the link should be free for about 24 hours, then behind a paywall again).  Many of the changes described seem sensible, though a lot depends on the department and its members (it is possible to have parties with alcohol without stupid behavior, after all).  The NYU "be nice" rules did make me laugh, not because they're terrible ideas but because a third or more of the faculty there were, historically, serial violators of them!  I was astonished, however, by this other bit of the article:

[Philosopher Janice Dowell] initially refused to publish in the Routledge Handbook of Epistemic Contextualism, due out next year, because she had "a lot of independent evidence" that a male philosopher who had also been asked to contribute was harassing women in the field, she says. She told the editor, Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa, about her concerns, and he confirmed that the other philosopher’s work would not appear in the volume.

This calls to mind our discussion from the other day.  I wonder, did Routledge know that the editor of a purportedly scholarly volume was also a vigilante acting as judge, jury and executioner?  (Ichikawa doesn't have much judgment, to be sure, but I do wonder what the philosophy editor at Routledge thinks about this.)  How many other philosophers working in this field were excluded as a sanction for their alleged misconduct?   What do epistemologists think about this?  Doesn't this kind of editorial decision-making pose a threat to the philosophical integrity of your field?  The Routledge Handbook is now damaged goods, isn't it?  I'm happy to say I've never heard of this kind of editorial behavior in any of the fields I'm most familiar with, so maybe this is just a pathology of epistemology only.

Let me offer a constructive suggestion.  If you believe you have credible evidence about misconduct by an academic elsewhere, contact colleagues in that department or contact the Title IX office at that university.  I've done the latter on one occasion (with, alas, mixed results, but this was because a crucial witness in the end was not willing to speak further with the Title IX enforcement officer).

Some of the people who ridicule Dopey Donald Chump on twitter...

...are very funny.

Police typically oppose laws that make it easier for civilians to carry guns...

...even in Texas.  But will the right-wing crazies in the legislature there act and do something sensible for once?

Cambridge's Tim Lewens interviewed...

...at 3AM.

Police killings in America: a somewhat different view

A few observations:

1.  Police officers in America, of all races, are overwhelmingly from working class backgrounds, unlike New York Times journalists, elite university professors, and assorted major media pundits.

2.  Some police officers are racist and some are sadistic, but there is no evidence that most are either.

3.  Police in America are charged with policing the most economically stratified nation in the "rich" world.

4.  Police in America are charged with policing the most heavily armed populace in the "rich" world.

5.  Police are, perhaps, a bit paranoid given #3 and #4.

Sunday Symphony: Mahler, "Resurrection"

 

Great moments in obscure rock 'n' roll: Spooky Tooth, "That Was Only Yesterday," 1969

This mostly British band (with one American, Gary Wright--of later "Dream Weaver" fame in the mid-1970s) never achieved the success it deserved with its mix of progressive, hard blues rock, and psychedelic themes in its music.  Greg Ridley the bass player went on to join Humble Pie.  This tune comes from their fabulous second album.

 

 

Roger Ailes, the reactionary villain who runs Fox and has done more to debase the public culture in America than anyone else...

...is also a decades-long sexual harasser.   One may hope this will do him in.

Pogge case makes The New York Times...

...with some new details and quotes from Charles Larmore and Seyla Benhabib, among others.

(Thanks to David Gordon for the pointer.)

Robert Paul Wolff on what Sanders has accomplished

This seems right to me.

Police murdered in Dallas during protest over recent police shootings of African-Americans

This is an ugly and dangerous turn of events which is going to spark more violence in all directions.  It is also going to fire up Trump's racist base.

UPDATE:  That it was a lone individual murdering police is better than the alternatives.  Although it was not an organized resurrection by African-Americans, it will still increase paranoia among police nationwide, which will only result in more harm.

Reaction formation watch? The case of Wisconsin Representative Steve Nass

The hopeful scenario is that he was simply too aroused by this reading.

Why Scotland balked on Brexit

Interesting piece, via my friend Alex Miller.

Not assigning Professor Pogge's work because of evidence of his misconduct towards women?

MOVING TO FRONT AGAIN FROM JULY 4--INTERESTING AND SUBSTANTIVE DISCUSSION IN THE COMMENTS, MORE THOUGHTS WELCOME

MOVING TO FRONT FROM JUNE 21--NOW OPEN FOR SUBSTANTIVE COMMENTS (e.g., explaining why his misconduct should or should not affect whether his work is assigned)

I was surprised to see this in the latest article concerning allegations about Prof. Pogge:

Prior to news articles published last month by BuzzFeed and HuffPost, some professors had been working behind the scenes to share what they knew about Pogge’s behavior and to encourage other academics to shun him. Those sorts of individual efforts are continuing in light of the public allegations. 

Sterba, for instance, said he’s no longer including Pogge’s work in exams for his graduate students.

“You don’t need him. He carries too much baggage — he doesn’t have to be cited anymore,” Sterba said. “He’s a negative image and we don’t need that. Maybe if he was Einstein we’d have to cite him, but he’s not.”

I fully understand not inviting Prof. Pogge to conferences, given the allegations that he uses them as dating opportunities (or worse), but not assigning his work when it is relevant to the topic?  Really?  That's educational malpractice, as far as I can see.   But let's see what readers think.

 

Customer Satisfaction Surveys

UPDATE:  So with almost 300 votes in the first hour-and-a-half, here's what the results look like:

Yes, I would no longer assign his work.    12%33 No, I would still assign his work.    72%203 Undecided    17%47

When I have time to moderate comments (probably not before July 1), I'll open a discussion so that the "no" and "undecided" voters might explain how they are thinking about things.

FINAL RESULT:  So with nearly 500 votes (497 to be precise) after about four hours, here are the results:

Yes, I would no longer assign his work.    13%63 No, I would still assign his work.    70%349 Undecided    17%85

As I won't be able to post again about this for awhile, I'll treat this as the result, a snapshot of some professional opinion.  More in a week or so when I can moderate comments.

Euro coin issued in honor of philosophy von Wright...

...in Finland.

(Thanks to Michael Swanson for the pointer.)

Reader e-mail

A kind note from a professor in another humanities field at Yale:

As long as we are in touch, I do want to say how much I do admire the blog: smart, principled, and fun.

Tufts' Brian Epstein wins 2016 Gittler Prize in Philosophy of Social Sciences

APA announcement here.

Britain's Brexit options

Seems sensible.

Nick Bostrom thinks AI robots could take over the world...

...while a self-driving car kills its driver (maybe intentionally?)  Joking aside, as  I was discussing with Markus Gabriel recently at the Bonn Summer School on the "Hermeneutics of Suspicion," there is something very odd about sci-fi fantasies about domination by robots occupying philosophers when there is actual domination by states and ruling economic elites throughout the developed world.  Imagine if equivalent intellectual energy were expended on the actual issues?  (Earlier discussion.)

Selective moral outrage: Elie Wiesel vs. Hedy Epstein

Indeed.

"The Paradoxes of Public Philosophy"

I was happy to be invited to contribute this to the inaugural issue of the Indian Journal of Legal Theory.  The paradox is twofold:  on the one hand, philosophy has no "results" it can report to the public that would guide its conduct; on the other hand, the public, including the supposedly "elite" sectors of the public, is quite clearly indifferent to the sorts of distinctions to which philosophers draw attention.  The one thing philosophers do offer is "discursive hygiene," which, as lawyers show, sometimes matters to what public institutions do, though philosophers might learn from lawyers the importance of rhetoric (once upon a time, philosophers did know that!).

What is it like to be a philosopher? David McNaughton edition

Courtesy of Clifford Sosis, as always.  Prof. McNaughton, a Brit, is currently Professor of Philosophy at Florida State University; this part of his interview was quite amusing:

Most Americans I meet are delightful, and I love their positive attitude. I hugely enjoy the vast amount of classical music concerts in Tallahassee. And Jan and Feb can be nice. But the rest of the year it is a tropical hell-hole, crawling with alligators, poisonous spiders and snakes, disease-laden mosquitos, ticks, etc. One third of the US population believe either that Obama is the anti-Christ, or that he may be. Trump is hugely popular. The country is obsessed with guns; the crime rate is appalling, and the penal system barbaric. Plus, you don’t have any historical places to speak of and you have to travel vast distances to see nice landscape. The UK also has many faults (some of which have surfaced dramatically in the last week) but the countryside, climate, and culture make up for it. Plus, the things I dislike are at least familiar rather than alien. One thing I have learned in my years in USA is that, just because we share a language and a history, one should not assume we are culturally akin. I feel more at home in most parts of Western Europe than in the USA.

Can a robot feel?

Philosopher of mind Susan Schneider (U Conn) addresses that and related questions in a Ted-x talk.

Another Republican (a former McCain advisor) explains why he won't vote for Dopey Donald Chump

It's a useful list of what's wrong with the mentally unstable charlatan.

Ignorant religious fanatic appointed to Board of Trustees at U of Louisville

What else is new in America?

Cal State-Fresno's Tina Fernandes Botts interviewed...

...at 3AM.

Sunday Symphony: Beethoven, "Pastorale"

Leonard Bernstein and the Boston Symphony:

 

Great moments in obscure rock 'n' roll: MC5, "The American Ruse," 1970

This proto-punk band out of Michigan in the late 1960s has always had a bit of a cult following ("kick out the jams, motherfuckers!"), though this later number is less-known (though apt for the Independence Day weekend in America, where the ruse even has a Presidential candidate the MC5 couldn't have conjured):

 

And for those wanting a more typical MC5 number, here's a live 1970 performance of "Ramblin' Rose":

Rescorla from UC Santa Barbara to UCLA

Michael Rescorla (philosophy of mind & psychology, philosophy of language), Professor of Philosophy at the University of California at Santa Barbara, has accepted a senior offer from the Department of Philosophy at the University of California, Los Angeles.

Another leading PhD programs offers guaranteed post-PhD employment to those who finish in a timely way

Last year, we noted Irvine's program, and it turns out Notre Dame has something similar.

(Thanks to Curtis Franks for the pointer.)

UPDATE:   Philosopher Ted Warfield (Notre Dame) writes:

This does guarantee "post-doc" funding to those who finish the PhD program in 5 years.

The overall changes to graduate funding at Notre Dame that included as one component this post-doc program were *not* good for Philosophy PhD students. As far as I know, every active PhD supervisor in the Notre Dame department who took a stand on the overall package of changes opposed the changes. So did the current PhD students in philosophy.

There's nothing inaccurate in what was posted nor in the links to the Notre Dame information about the post-docs. But there weren't changes that were good for philosophy.

Advertising update

August will be the last month of reduced summer rates due to reduced blogging; there is still one top spot ($300) available that month.

Rates go back to normal in September ($700/$600/$500); there is one top, one second from the top, and one third still available.  Top spots are sold out for October, but there is one second and one third from the top still available.   There is also still one top spot in each of November and December available, as well as some lower level spots.