Leiter Reports: A Philosophy Blog

Faculty on Strike in Pennsylvania...

A strike in the Pennsylvania system has been brewing for some time.  I'll open it up for comments from philosophers who want to share information about the strike.

Best APA Letter Ever

A little over a year ago, I posted a sort of how-to for being married to a philosopher. It prompted Mark Bernstein to send along this incredibly funny letter to the editor from vol 62. of the APA Proceedings, written by his (then) wife Nancy Daley. He had this to say about the letter, " I'm biased, but I think it's the best letter ever published by the APA Proceedings."  

You should read the full letter at JSTOR. But, here are a few choice excerpts: 

I was in my late twenties, just finishing a Bachelor’s degree in English, when the prospect of marrying a philosopher first materialized. I recall with vivid clarity that autumn afternoon in my poetry professor’s dormered office when I announced I had finally decided to marry Mark. Without even lifting his gaze from his cluttered desk, Mr. Conner announced. "Well. You’ll never win an argument.”

This. Oh, for the love of all that's holy, this. 

And lest you think philosophy is the only topic open to interminable discussion, I will mention only in passing a certain night I spent on a sofa in Princeton listening to Mark and his friend, Stewart [Stew Cohen], analyzing the apparently unforgivable syntax of a passage in the Toyota Owner’s Manual on the topic of downshifting.

In Memoriam: Tomis Kapitan (1949-2016)

Professor David Buller (Northern Illinois) asked me to share this memorial notice:

Tomis Kapitan, Distinguished Teaching Professor Emeritus at Northern Illinois University, passed away October 12 in London, where he had been living since his retirement in 2014. He was 66.  Professor Kapitan was a member of the Philosophy Department at NIU for 23 years, during which time he served as a model philosopher, teacher, and colleague, enriching the life of the department and inspiring generations of students through whom his example and influence live on.

Professor Kapitan, who studied with Hector-Neri Castenada at Indiana University, Bloomington, published many articles on topics in philosophy of language, metaphysics, and philosophy of logic, and also wrote extensively on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Kamtekar from Arizona to Cornell

Rachana Kamtekar (ancient philosophy, ethics), Professor of Philosophy at the University of Arizona, has accepted a senior offer from the Department of Philosophy at Cornell University (effective 2017-18), where she will join Tad Brennan and Charles Brittain in continuing Cornell's strong tradition in ancient philosophy.  (Gail Fine officially retires from Cornell at the end of 2016-17.)

Colin Kaepernick in the Philosophy Classroom...

Colin Kaepernick is a multi-millionaire, NFL quarterback for the San Francisco 49ers. He recently made headlines by refusing to stand for the U.S. National Anthem before the start of NFL games. Lot of people have impassioned opinions on the acceptability of his refusal to stand, even a Supreme Court Justice, who eventually apologized for the remark, have been critical of him.

Last week, one of my students asked me about Kaepernick during class. This was one of those teachable moments we all really look for. Philosophy in the real world making a difference! I said unless someone really understood his reasoning, they couldn’t be critical of the refusal to stand. The student pressed me on my view…

Ayn Rand and Public Schools in Chicago...

Readers my find this story about Chicago Public School CEO, Forrest Claypool, interesting.  It's just another example of the consequences of Ayn Rand fundamentalism.

You Can't Just Talk to Each Other

I know some philosophers find telling laypeople that they are philosophers or explaining what philosophy is tiring. On the other hand, some philosophers give a veritable conference paper to the simple question, “What do you do?”

Even though the malevolent narcissist Trump is going to lose the election in a few weeks...

...we won't be done with him, since he's psychologically incapable of losing gracefully, and will without a doubt do his best to incite violence and disruption after the election.   My prediction, however, is that once he has officially lost, Republican leaders will move quickly to repudiate and discredit him in full.   One fortunate aspect of his latest insane rhetoric about election fraud is that it may depress turnout among his supporters, which will have ramifications for other Republican candidates.  In the happiest scenario, Trump's craziness will hand the House (as well as the Senate) to the Democrats.

Reflections on my APA Committee Service

From the fall of 2012 to the spring of 2015, I was a member of the APA’s Status and Future of the Profession Committee.   I wrote in a comment to this post that my service was both rewarding and informative.

Like all standing committees of the APA, the Status and Future of the Profession Committee receives charges from the Board of Directors. As far as I know, there are no policies and procedures document for running the committee apart from Board charges; however, during the three years I served, the committee was charged with reviewing grant applications, and we were given clear guidelines for that. There were a few additional issues the interested can read about in the committee reports publically available here.

(1) Create policies and procedures documents that govern the work of each committee. These can be updated and changed through the years as the role of the committee changes, but to get the most out of the committees, they need more operating direction than just charges from the board.

(2) Staff committees with members who are more representative of the profession as a whole. This means the members should not come primarily from Ph.D. granting institutions and elite liberal arts colleges. If fact, I claim it would be best to have assigned, specific representation on each committee as well as at-large spots. Representational make up, of course, would be outlined in a policies and procedures document, but here is my suggestion: At least one member from the following: Ph.D. granting program, M.A. (and no Ph.D.) granting program, B.A. granting program, a community college representative, and four at-large seats. Having representation on these committees from a wide variety of constituency groups offers more buy in for all APA members.

On kinds of charisma...and Dopey Donald Chump

This is an interesting essay by sociologist Randall Collins (Penn), though I'm not sure I find the application to Trump that persuasive.

(Thanks to Howard Berman for the pointer.)

Deep Cuts in Indie Music

Okay, so it's not great moments in obscure rock n' roll, but it might get you through until Leiter's next installment.

Josh Ritter's "Idaho," 2006 (The Animal Years)  

NYU's Samuel Scheffler interviewed...

...at 3AM.

A Case of Class Over Curriculum? (Philosophy and the LSAT)

Philosophers often use LSAT data as a marketing tool to convince students who want to go to law school that they should major in philosophy. But how do we really know studying philosophy is the key to higher scores? Are the high scores really the result of studying philosophy or is there some other cause? In this post, I am going to suggest that privilege and economic class, rather than studying philosophy, better explain philosophy students’ LSAT results. Even if my suspicions are only partly right, it should make philosophers think twice about selling philosophy merely as a means to higher LSAT scores.

Making a causal connection for or against is very difficult (that alone should make us think twice). We don’t have access to either state level LSAT averages or LSAT scores from individual schools. What we have is the average score by majors. I am going to start with 2014 LSAC applicants by major report. Five of the most popular LSAT taking majors are: Political Science, Criminal Justice, Economics, Philosophy, and Sociology. Here are the LSAT results for those five majors:

Yale Philosopher Wins Nobel Prize in Literature?!

Oh, wait. It's Bob Dylan.

See  what prescient Bill Wyman had to say about Bob Dylan and the Nobel prize in 2013. I don't happen to agree, but he makes a pretty decent case. You can see how Dylan stacks up to past winners here.

Best PhD Programs for Philosophy of Law for 2016-17

Following up on this post, and once again taking account of faculty changes since the fall 2014 PGR, here's an attempted update of the top (3.5 or higher) programs for Philosophy of Law for 2016-17, again by rough "clusters" of peer programs:

Group 1 (1)

Oxford University

Group 2 (2-5)

New York University

University of California, Los Angeles

University of Chicago

Yale University

Philosophy Accreditation Redux

Last October, I wrote about accreditation as a way to create support for philosophy at colleges and universities. It generated some good comments, but I wanted to reiterate my support for philosophy accreditation. After the post, I received a supportive email from a philosopher who had recently entered into an academic leadership position. With permission, here is part of what this concerned philosopher wrote:

“I am part of a public university undergrad-only department that likely faces similar issues to yours. I am writing to you specifically to ask if you know anything about efforts to institute an accreditation program for Philosophy programs, since this came up as part of the discussion related to your previous posts.

I fully sympathize with philosophy faculty who argue that the widespread push for data-driven analysis, detailed top-down assessment procedures, and things like curriculum mapping have not caught on in Philosophy for good reason. Our subject matter resists this sort of thing and could even be badly distorted and misrepresented by it, unfortunately.

Math, Logic, and Intellectual Disability in University General Education

Most colleges and universities have a general education mathematics requirement with some, including WIU, allowing a gen ed logic classes to satisfy that mathematics requirement. I am most interested in discussing the issue of mathematical reasoning standards for general education--specifically logic classes and students with cognitive or intellectual disabilities.

My main concern is with students who have intellectual disabilities. These disabilities are things like dyscalculia or acalculia, but also IQ levels that are in the 70s. As an educator, I am struggling with methods of teaching and evaluating students who have genuine intellectual disabilities and can’t do the work necessary to pass my class with a grade of ‘C’. The ‘C’ threshold has become a bigger issue for me in the last year since the replacement course grade standard was changed from a ‘D-’ to ‘C’ to be in line with the mathematics course requirement.

UIC's Sedgwick declines Berkeley offer

Sally Sedgwick (Kant, German Idealism), Distinguished Professor of Philosophy at the University of Illinois at Chicago, has declined the senior offer from Berkeley.  That's a significant retention for UIC.

Some background to the new "Philosophy of Law" entry at Encyclopedia Brittanica

Here.

A Minor Major Adjustment

It’s nice to be invited back, and I want to thank Brian for letting me blog on his site again. For those of you interested in a follow up story to the elimination of the Western Illinois University philosophy major and the closing of the Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, let me get you all up to date.

The Philosophy and Religious Studies department has been eliminated along with its two majors. What is left are minors in both philosophy and religious studies and about two dozen philosophy majors that need to be taught out. Over the summer the Provost tasked the faculty in the eliminated departments with finding academic homes. The Religious Studies faculty voted to join the faculty in the eliminated programs and departments of Women’s Studies and African American Studies to become the Department of Liberal Arts and Sciences pending IBHE approval. The four remaining philosophers, not including our dean, were keen to find an academic home where we would fit academically AND retain some identifiable presence on campus. Not an easy task, and other departments in our college weren’t particularly interested in taking on four additional faculty members when layoffs were (and are still) a concern. The chair of Mathematics, however, offered to do just that--provide an academic home and a visible presence on campus.

How? The chair, presumably to signal his support of philosophy and its importance to a university education, submitted a request to the Provost to change the department name to: “Mathematics, Logic, and Philosophy.” We are awaiting approval, but if it is approved, philosophy will still have some visibility on campus.

It’s all a bit strange, and being in a new department is like starting a new job. Also I’m no longer recruiting students and discussing the benefits of a major in philosophy, even so, we do realize we need to market our minor. Some readers may remember this. Unfortunately this doesn’t have quite the same ring: “Thinking about a minor, minor in thinking.”

I am opening comments on this thread so that people can share and discuss successful programs and strategies for promoting philosophy minors.

A clarification about the PGR updates and how programs are listed within groups

Within a group, the list is alphabaetical!   I've been told some students did not realize that.

Best PhD Programs for 20th-century Continental Philosophy, 2016-17

Following up on this post, and once again taking account of faculty changes since the fall 2014 PGR, here's an attempted update of the top (3.5 or higher) programs for 20th-century Continental philosophy for 2016-17, again by rough "clusters" of peer programs:

Group 1 (1-2)

Columbia University (incl. Barnard)

University of California, Riverside

Group 2 (3-7)

Georgetown University

Northwestern University

Best PhD Programs for History of Analytic Philosophy (incl. Wittgenstein) for 2016-17

Following up on this post, and once again taking account of faculty changes since the fall 2014 PGR, it's not clear any update of the top (3.5 or higher) programs for History of Analytic Philosophy (incl. Wittgenstein) for 2016-17 is needed.  Perhaps Irvine would now be in Group 1, but that's about it.  This is an area with huge fault lines, so bear that in mind, and look at medians and modes as well.   There is, crudely, the "Drebenized" view of the history of analytic philosophy and then the view of the history of analytic philosophy by those who very much think of themselves as still doing analytic philosophy.  Programs in something like the first group would include Harvard, Indiana, Stanford, Chicago, Illinois/Chicago and Pittsburgh, among others; programs in something like the second group would include Brown, Oxford, UCLA, Texas, NYU, and USC, among others.  I'm happy for experts--signed comments, full name and valid e-mail address required--to correct my perception, or to add nuance to it.

2016-17 ranking of the best philosophy PhD programs taking account of faculty changes since the fall 2014 PGR

MOVING TO FRONT (ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED SEPTEMBER 13, 2016)

Back in the old days (from 1989 through the late 1990s), the PGR consisted in my assessement of professional opinion about the quality of graduate programs in the form of an annual guide to prospective PhD students in philosophy in the Anglophone world.  This was my assessment of professional opinion, not my own opinion about quality.  I was sufficiently good at that that the PGR became hugely influential throughout the profession, so much so that faculty at departments not doing so well began protesting back in 2001.  I gradually shifted to more systematic measurements--elaborate on-line surveys of senior and junior faculty--which just amplified the influence of the PGR.   The results were not very dissimilar from when I was doing it from the armchair, but the evaluations of particular areas of specialization were clearly improved.

Brit Brogaard's plan is try to undertake new PGR surveys in fall 2017, but that doesn't obviate the need for some updated guidance.  What follows is my best judgment as to how the faculty changes in the interim should lead prospective PhD students to think about the relevant hierarchy of PhD programs in the U.S. and elsewhere compared to the 2014 survey results.  Rather than offer a guestimate about an ordinal rank, I put the PhD programs into "clusters" of what I think should reasonably be considered "peer" programs among which students should choose based on considerations other than "overall prestige."   But I generally think it's reasonable to choose between programs in adjacent peer groups based on other considerations (financial aid, location, particular faculty, specialty strength etc.).  I'll try to update the "specialty rankings" in the coming weeks. 

An * indicates a program that arguably belongs in the next highest peer grouping.

 

Group 1 (1)                                                                 Anglophone Programs outside the U.S.

New York University                                            

Group 2 (2-8)

Princeton University                                                    *Oxford University

*Rutgers University, New Brunswick

University of California, Berkeley

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

University of Pittsburgh

University of Southern California

Yale University

Group 3 (9-15)

Columbia University                                                University of Toronto                                            

Harvard University                                            

Massachussetts Institute of Technology

Stanford University

University of Arizona

University of California, Los Angeles

University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

Group 4 (16-22)

Brown University                                                    Cambridge University                                                                                        

City University of New York Graduate Center           Australian National University

University of California, San Diego

University of Chicago

University of Notre Dame

University of Texas, Austin

University of Wisconsin, Madison

Group 5 (23-27)

*Cornell University                                                University of St. Andrews/University of Stirling Joint Program

Duke University                                                    University of Edinburgh                                                                                                

Indiana University, Bloomington                            King's College, London

University of California, Irvine                               University College London

Washington University, St. Louis                            University of Sydney                  

UNC-Chapel Hill retains Laurie (L.A.) Paul in face of Pitt offer from last Spring

That's a significant retention for Chapel Hill, and will guarantee that UNC continues as a leading choice for students interested in metaphysics.

When the always Republican-leaning pollster Rasmussen reports that Clinton now has a 7-point lead on Trump...

...you know the Trumpacolypse will be averted!

AND A MORE REPUTABLE pollster (NBC/Wall Street Journal), consistent with the preceding, shows Clinton up by 11 points.  The really happy scenario is that this magnitude of a loss at the top of the ticket will throw both the Senate and the House to the Democrats, and then the liberals and 1970s Republicans who make up that party can actually govern!

Deas, Pynes returning as guest bloggers this week

I'm very happy to report that the always popular and insightful Darlene Deas and Christopher Pynes will be returning as guest bloggers this week, starting on Wednesday, October 12 and continuing for about a week.  I will have a few posts too, but they will be the main attraction!

Best PhD Programs for Decision, Rational Choice & Game Theory (incl. formal epistemology) for 2016-17

Following up on this post, and once again taking account of faculty changes since the fall 2014 PGR, here's an attempted update of the top (3.5 or higher) programs for Decision Theory et al. for 2016-17, again by rough "clusters" of peer programs:

Group 1 (1-3)

Carnegie-Mellon University

London School of Economics

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

Group 2 (4-6)

Australian National University

Oxford University

University of California, Irvine

Philosopher Helga Varden (Illinois/Urbana) interviewed...

...at the APA blog.  Short and fun!

The ridiculous spectacle of Trump and the Republican Party

This is a very funny commentary.

(Thanks to Dean Rowan for the pointer.)

Wisconsin's Elliott Sober interviewed...

...at 3AM.

Sunday Classical: Beethoven, Piano concerto #4

 

 

Great moments in obscure rock 'n' roll: Orang-Utan, "Chocolate Piano," 1971

Another tune from the one and only album by this British hard rock/blues outfit featuring two lead guitars:

 

 

A nice statement from Jason Stanley (Yale) about the right-wing media brouhaha

Here (in response to events we referenced here).  (I don't find the anti-Semitism bit at the end very helpful, but that's minor.)

UPDATE:  At the link, above, Dean Zimmerman (Rutgers), a very prominent Christian philosopher who has made major contributions to metaphysics, writes:

I know firsthand, having been his colleague for quite a few years, that Jason is highly sensitive to the fact that Christians are something of a minority within philosophy. There were several Christian graduate students at Rutgers while Jason was here, and with whom he interacted frequently, and I am confident that none of them ever felt disrespected by Jason because of their faith. To the contrary, in my experience Jason seems to optimistically and automatically think well of his Christian colleagues and students — as though he could count on serious Christians to exemplify the virtues we profess. I’m grateful that he doesn’t lump us all in with political conservatives who are hijacking religious language, some of whom will apparently use any means to inflict psychic damage upon those they perceive as their “enemies”. Thank you, Jason.

The latest bizarre twist in the 2016 election

Most readers have probably heard by now about an interview in which Trump jokes about various acts of sexual assault and how he can get away with them, which now is leading to speculation that he'll withdraw (he won't) or, perhaps a bit more likely, that the Republican Party will instruct the electors to choose someone else when they vote in December, probably Mike Pence, the extremely conservative Indiana Governor who is Trump's usually invisible VP candidate.  That would be a risky gambit for the Republicans, since it's not clear whether the message would get out in time to affect the election, and it's also not clear what the effect would actually be, given the cult-like loyalty Trump enjoys among an alarmingly large segment of the electorate.   I'll add links if I see any intelligent analyses of these possible scenarios (please e-mail me, readers, if you see any).  As things stand now, we are looking at a huge win for the Democrats, and Trump still has another month of gaffes and outbursts to come (plus two more debates, starting tomorrow)!

ADDENDUM:  This is informative on the options, such as they are.

ANOTHER:  Senator McCain, the 2008 Republican nominee, officially withdraws support for Trump.  The Republican implosion begins.  Amazing it took this long!

UPDATE:  I believe this was filmed prior to the latest disgraceful episode, but it expresses, in proper New York vernacular, what many no doubt feel about Trump:

 

 

So who should get a Nobel Prize in philosophy?

With over 565 responses to our earlier poll (limited, recall, to living philosophers over age 60), we now know whom readers think are the ten most deserving candidates: 

1. Saul Kripke  (Condorcet winner: wins contests with all other choices)

2. Noam Chomsky  loses to Saul Kripke by 245–142

3. Derek Parfit  loses to Saul Kripke by 260–113, loses to Noam Chomsky by 197–164

4. Thomas Nagel  loses to Saul Kripke by 278–98, loses to Derek Parfit by 173–148

5. Martha Nussbaum  loses to Saul Kripke by 272–110, loses to Thomas Nagel by 176–130

6. Jurgen Habermas  loses to Saul Kripke by 273–108, loses to Martha Nussbaum by 154–141

7. Daniel Dennett  loses to Saul Kripke by 282–98, loses to Jurgen Habermas by 150–145

8. Jerry Fodor  loses to Saul Kripke by 292–64, loses to Daniel Dennett by 148–139

9. John Searle  loses to Saul Kripke by 294–63, loses to Jerry Fodor by 142–124

10. Amartya Sen  loses to Saul Kripke by 288–81, loses to John Searle by 148–121

Timothy Williamson and John McDowell were runners-up for the top ten.  Allowing for the Anglophone bias of the readership here, these results aren't surprising and certainly seem defensible.  I was, I confess, surprised how poorly Charles Taylor fared, even allowing for the Anglophone bias.

Government bars foreign academics from consulting on Brexit!

What a bizarre development.

(Thanks to Peter Kail for the pointer.)

A philosopher looks at Swinburne's argument

Rob Hughes, a young moral, political and legal philosopher teaching in the Wharton School at the University of Pennslyvania, writes:

Having read Richard Swinburne's recent argument about the ethics of homosexuality, both the version he published in 2007/2008 and the version he presented in his talk at the SCP meeting, I can confirm your belief that his argument is awful. There is no need to discuss Swinburne's dubious moral premises. The argument clearly fails because it relies on a false and unjustified empirical assertion. Here it is, in Swinburne's own words (from the text of his recent talk posted on First Things, pp. 12-13):

"The evidence seems to me to indicate clearly that genes and environment (nature and nurture) both play a role in determining sexual orientation; and also that this orientation is sometimes to a considerable extent reversible[10]. So if there was a general recognition in society of an obligation to abstain from homosexual acts, that would prevent homosexual behaviour being presented as an option for young people of equal value to the heterosexual one which makes possible procreative marriage. That would deter the young from wondering whether they are really homosexual when previously it would not have occurred to them, in consequence experimenting with homosexual sexual acts, getting accustomed to such behaviour and so developing a homosexual orientation."

Swinburne asserts here that sexual experimentation in adolescence or adulthood influences people's sexual orientation. This assertion is not an off-hand remark; it is crucial to his argument that God has a reason to prohibit homosexual conduct. (Swinburne does not think that natural law prohibits homosexual conduct; indeed, he nicely dispatches this view in one sentence on p. 8.) Swinburne's assertion is at odds with the evidence that a person's future sexual orientation is determined before school age and possibly much earlier. He provides no evidence for his assertion that sexual experimentation influences orientation, either in his 2007 book Revelation, or in his 2008 reply to critics, or in the text of his recent talk.

Swinburne claims to have provided evidence that adults can change their sexual orientation, but to call his evidence shoddy would be too generous. His 2007 book cited a study purporting to show that some people had changed their sexual orientation through "reparative therapy." The study's author, Robert Spitzer, retracted the study in 2012 and said that its methodology had a "fatal flaw." Swinburne's recent SCP talk acknowledges this retraction. The talk instead cites Michelle Wolkomir's 2006 book Be Not Deceived as evidence that "the sexual orientation of some, but perhaps not most, homosexuals can be changed to a significant degree." (19) The book is an ethnographic study of two small groups of gay and "ex-gay" Christians and their self-understanding. Treating this study as evidence that people can change their sexual orientation is a mistake for the same reason Spitzer's study was flawed: we have no way to establish that subjects who reported changed sexual desires were sincere and not deceiving themselves. The large number of ex-ex-gays gives us reason to suspect that people are either insincere or deceiving themselves if they claim to have altered their sexual orientations (including their desires as well as their behavior).

A journal editor's "wish list"

A sensible and reasonable list from philosopher Jennifer Lackey (Northwestern).

Free University of Berlin's Jan Slaby interivewed...

...at 3AM.

California passes law that would seem to prohibit academics at public institutions from visiting countries...

...that discriminate against LGBT citizens--which is a lot of countries!    Philosopher Michael Cholbi called this to my attention, but I haven't seen much on it, though it would seem to be a significant violation of the contractual right of California faculty to academic freedom, since there are many pedagogical and research-related reasons faculty might need to travel to countries with otherwise reprehensible policies.   Comments are open for readers who know more about this law and what it means.

Looking towards fall 2017: lateral faculty moves and changes since the fall 2014 PGR

MOVING TO FRONT (originally posted Sept. 4, 2015)--last updated January 25, 2017.

Since the fall 2014 PGR surveys, here are the major lateral moves with tenure that have taken place: 

Karl Ameriks (Kant, German Idealism) retired from the University of Notre Dame at the end of 2015-16.

Roger Ames (Chinese philosophy) is retiring from the University of Hawaii during 2016-17.

Andrew Arana (logic, philosophy of mathematics) from the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign to the University of Paris I (Pantheon-Sorbonne) (belated addition, this move transpired in 2015).

Frank Arntzenius (philosophy of science and physics) will retire from Oxford University at the end of 2016-17.

Paul Audi (metaphysics, philosophy of mind) from the University of Nebraska, Omaha to the University of Rochester. 

Tim Bayne (philosophy of mind) from the Universities of Manchester & Western Ontario to Monash University.

Tom Beauchamp (Hume, bioethics) is retiring from Georgetown University at the end of 2015-16.

Sara Bernstein (metaphysics) from Duke University to the University of Notre Dame.

Bernard Boxill (social & political philosophy, philosophy of race) at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill has retired.

Luc Bovens (decision theory, epistemology, political philosophy, philosophy of economics) from the London School of Economics to the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.

Matthew Boyle (philosophy of mind, Kant, German Idealism) from Harvard University to the University of Chicago.

Katherine Brading (history and philosophy of physics, early modern philosophy) from the University of Notre Dame to Duke University.

Rachael Briggs (metaphysics, epistemology, decision theory) from the Australian National University to Stanford University.

Charles Brittain (ancient philosophy) from Cornell University to the University of Toronto.

Janet Broughton (early modern philosophy) retired from the University of California, Berkeley at the end of 2015-16.

Campbell Brown (ethics, political philosophy) from the University of Glasgow to the London School of Economics (untenured lateral).

Ben Caplan (metaphysics) from Ohio State University to the University of Kansas.

Jennifer Carr (epistemology, philosophy of language) from the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign to the University of California, San Diego (untenured lateral).

Andrew Chignell (Kant, early modern philosophy, philosophy of religion) from Cornell University to the University of Pennsylvania.

John M. Cooper (ancient philosophy, ethics) retired from Princeton University at the end of 2015-16.

Tim Crane (philosophy of mind, metaphysics) from Cambridge University to Central European University (in 2017-18).

Shamik Dasgupta (metaphysics, philosophy of science) from Princeton University to the University of California, Berkeley.

Heather Demarest (philosophy of science, metaphysics, philosophy of physics) from the University of Oklahoma, Norman to the University of Colorado, Boulder (untenured lateral) (in 2017-18)

Michael DePaul (epistemology) retired from the University of Notre Dame at the end of 2015-16.

Phil Dowe (metaphysics, philosophy of science) from the University of Queensland to the Australian National University.

Annalisa Coliva (philosophy of mind, metaphysics, epistemology, history of analytic philosophy) from the University of Modina to the University of California, Irvine.

Luca Ferrero (philosophy of action, moral psychology) from the University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee to the University of California, Riverside.

Gail Fine (ancient philosophy) retires from Cornell University at the end of 2016-17.

Branden Fitelsen (formal epistemology, decision theory, logic, philosophy of science) from Rutgers University, New Brunswick to Northeastern University.

Alfred Freddoso (medieval philosophy) retired from the University of Notre Dame at the end of 2015-16.

Miranda Fricker (ethics, feminist philosophy, epistemology) from the University of Sheffield to the City University of New York Graduate Center.

Mathias Frisch (philosophy of physics, philosophy of science) from the University of Maryland, College Park to the University of Hannover.

Mikkel Gerken (epistemology, philosophy of mind/cognitive science) from the University of Edinburgh to the University of Southern Denmark.

Peter Godfrey-Smith (philosophy of biology, science, & mind) from the City University of New York Graduate Center to the University of Sydney.

Alexander Guerrero (political and legal philosophy) from the University of Pennsylvania to Rutgers University, New Brunswick.

Gary Gutting (20th-century Continental philosophy, philosophy of science, philosophy of religion) retired from the University of Notre Dame at the end of 2015-16.H

John Haldane (ethics, social philosophy, medieval philosophy, philosophy of mind) from the University of St Andrews to Baylor University (this took place awhile ago, but was an error of omission here)

Victoria Harrison (philosophy of religion, Asian and comparative philosophies) from the University of Glasgow to the University of Macau, China (effective fall 2016).  

Carl Hoefer (history and philosophy of science and physics, metaphysics) from the University of Western Ontario to the University of Barcelona.

Lester Hunt (ethics, political philosophy, Nietzsche) retires from the University of Wisconsin, Madison at the end of 2015-16.

Thomas Johansen (ancient philosophy) from Oxford University to the University of Oslo.

Rachana Kamtekar (ancient philosophy, ethics) from the University of Arizona to Cornell University.

Peter Klein (epistemology) retires from Rutgers University, New Brunswick at the end of 2015-16.

Daniel Korman (metaphysics, philosophy of language) from the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign to University of California, Santa Barbara (effective fall 2017).

Manfred Kuehn (Kant) has retired from Boston University.

Jonathan Kvanvig (epistemology, philosophy of religion) from Baylor University to Washington University, St. Louis.

Peter Lewis (philosophy of physics and science, formal epistemology) from the University of Miami to Dartmouth College.

Eden Lin (ethics) from Rutgers University, Newark to Ohio State University (untenured lateral).

Good luck to all friends and readers in Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina

Stay safe!

Best PhD Programs for Philosophy of Cognitive Science, 2016-17

Following up on this post, and once again taking account of faculty changes since the fall 2014 PGR, here's an attempted update of the top (3.5 or higher) programs for philosophy of cognitive science for 2016-17, again by rough "clusters" of peer programs:

Group 1 (1-4)

City University of New York Graduate Center

New York University

Rutgers University, New Brunswick

University of Arizona

Group 2 (5-13)

Duke University

University of British Columbia

University of California, Berkeley

There is no bottom to vile in cyberspace (October 6)

Several months ago, I learned, via the Chair of the Philosophy Department at British Columbia, that my old pal Carrie Jenkins had received an "offensive" package, and that the return address consisted in a mangled version of my Law School's address and a pseudonym attributed to me by a law blogger who had championed the idea that "law school is a scam" and whom I had mercilessly criticized for years (a short and sweet explanation of the whole background is here).  That was weird, but I didn't think much of it, and no information about the "offensive" content was shared.

Then, in late August, David Velleman wrote to me as follows:

> From: David Velleman [mailto:dv26@nyu.edu]

> Sent: Saturday, August 27, 2016 3:17 PM

> To: Leiter, Brian <bleiter@uchicago.edu>

> Subject: An imposter

> Dear Brian,

> A few people have received packages of excrement from someone using your law-school address and a name widely [sic] believed to be your pseudonym. I assume it can't be you -- which means that someone is trying to embarrass you. I don't know if there's anything you can do about it, but I thought you would want to know. Some of the recipients have reported the packages to the police.

> David

An amusing evisceration of Trump by the author...

...who coined the name "short-fingered vulgarian" for Trump back in the 1980s; from the conclusion:

He has touched—embraced!—every third rail in American politics. He has offended (and I apologize if I’ve left some group out): African-Americans, Native Americans, Mexicans, Jews, Muslims, war heroes—war heroes!—families of war heroes, the disabled, women, and babies. Babies! Through word or action, Trump has promoted gun violence, bigotry, ignorance, intolerance, lying, and just about everything else that can be wrong with a society. And yet he marches on, playing to a constituency that just doesn’t seem to care. The thing is, this ramshackle campaign, following a ramshackle business career, has exposed his flaws and failures to the world and, more importantly, to the people he will brush up against for the rest of his life. To them he is now officially a joke. I suspect he knows this. And if his thin skin on minor matters is any indication, he will be lashing out with even more vitriol. He is a mad jumble of a man, with a slapdash of a campaign and talking points dredged from the dark corners at the bottom of the Internet. I don’t think he will get to the White House, but just the fact that his carny act has gotten so far along the road will leave the path with a permanent orange stain. Trump, more than even the most craven politicians or entertainers, is a bottomless reservoir of need and desire for attention. He lives off crowd approval. And at a certain point that will dim, as it always does to people like him, and the cameras will turn to some other American novelty. When that attention wanes, he will be left with his press clippings, his dyed hair, his fake tan, and those tiny, tiny fingers.

Bayne from Manchester & Western Ontario to Monash

Tim Bayne (philosophy of mind) has left his posts at the Universities of Manchester and Western Ontario to take up a Professorship at Monash University in Melbourne, effective last month.

Tempest in a teapot watch: philosophers are rude and vulgar, right-wing media eat it up

We touched on this briefly last week, but as so often happens, it's taken on a life of its own on various right-wing websites.  Briefly, the usual "high-school-with-tenure" crowd on Facebook was reacting to the brouhaha about Richard Swinburne's anti-gay bigotry (discussed here).   Jason Stanley (Yale), on his Facebook-page-cum-blog responded with a "fuck off" and then a reaffirmation and, shall we say, "elaboration" of the "fuck off" aimed at Swinburne and his ilk.   Rebecca Kukla (Georgetown) (another regular in this crowd, whose FB "tough talk" we've encountered before), chimed in with the suggestion that the anti-gay bigots "suck my giant queer cock."  There are two reasonably calm accounts of events here and here, both of which include slightly different (and somewhat odd) explanations from Stanley about what transpired. Meanwhile, a right-wing website called "Georgetown Academy" has been pursuing Kukla, claiming that her "message to Catholics" was "suck my giant queer cock."  That isn't quite right:  at best, that was her "message" to Catholics who are anti-gay bigots.  Meanwhile, Jason has, wisely I suspect, removed his Facebook account, to deprive the enemy of further ammunition (though my recollection of his FB page was that it was mostly an extended exercise in "enough about me, what do you think about me?").

I will note that my own comments on L'Affaire Swinburne--"Swinburne offered the usual awful arguments for anti-gay bigotry that "natural law" theorists and Christian philosophers usually trot out.  No one outside the sect takes the arguments seriously, because they aren't serious arguments, but put that to one side.   This talk was given inside the "sect":  should anyone have been surprised that a keynote address at a Christian philosophy conference included familiar arguments rationalizing anti-gay bigotry?  Many self-identified Christian philosophers reject such arguments, but many others plainly do not"--didn't provoke nearly as strong a reaction, no doubt due to the absence of vulgar abuse aimed at Swinburne.  It's testimony to the power of vulgar words that they can provoke such a strong reaction by contrast.  My suggestion, were either Professors Stanley or Kukla taking my advice, would be to apologize for the unfortunate choice of language (everyone, after all, is allowed to have a visceral reaction, and there's nothing wrong with harsh language), but reaffirm the substance of their opposition to anti-gay bigotry, even when it masquerades as philosophy.  (You know things are getting weird in philosophy cyberspace when I'm the one giving cyber-etiquette advice!  But seriously, having been through right-wing cyber-shitstorms, I think this is a good way to defuse them.)

So if there were a Nobel Prize in philosophy...

...who among living philosophers should get it?   I've included about fifty living philosophers over the age of 60 who might have some shot at making the "top ten" here (I've omitted lots of accomplished philosophers and scholars obviously).   So a propos the new Berggruen Prize, let's see what philosophers think.

ADDENDUM:  Just to be clear, think of this  as a prize for philosophical excellence, however you understand that.  There are no further constraints, as there appear to have been with the Berggruen (e.g., relevance to public life).

ANOTHER:  Two readers have already pointed out one error of omission, Gilbert Harman.  Unfortunately, once the poll starts, I can't add names.

ALAS:  Two more omissions:  Harry Frankfurt, Judith Jarvis Thomson (sigh).  Would any of these folks made the top ten?  Hard to say. 

Is Trump like Thrasymachus?

This is probably unfair to Thrasymachus.