Leiter Reports: A Philosophy Blog

New Books in February

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

Plotinus by Eyjolfur K. Emilsson (Routledge, 2017) (part of the Routledge Philosophers series).

Self-Reflection for the Opaque Mind:  An Essay in Neo-Sellarsian Philosophy by T. Parent (Routledge, 2017).

The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Social Science edited by Lee McIntyre & Alex Rosenberg (Routledge, 2017).

The Routledge Companion to Sixteenth Century Philosophy edited by Henrik Lagerlund & Benjamin Hill (Routledge, 2017).

Metaphysics:  A Contemporary Introduction (4th edition) by Michael J. Loux & Thomas M. Crisp (Routledge, 2017).

Ethics in Politics:  The Right and Obligations of Individual Political Agents edited by Emily M. Crookston, David Killoren & Jonathan Trerise (Routledge, 2017).

Introduction to Logic (Third edition) by Harry J. Gensler (Routledge, 2017).

On Human Nature by Roger Scruton (Princeton University Press, 2017).

Wrongs and Crimes by Victor Tadros (Oxford University Press, 2017).

Motivation Ethics by Mathew Coakley (Bloomsbury, 2017).

Trump and the Russia distraction

I've had a lot to say about Trump, not much about the Trump-Russia sideshow that's been raging in Washington, which has seemed to me either a non-story or a distraction.  Trump's admiration for Putin is easy to explain purely in terms of his psychological disturbance, without recourse to any of the tall tales circulating.  Of course, the Russia issue may finally turn some Republicans against Trump, which would be salutary, but that's a separate matter.

In any case, philosophy PhD student Philippe Lemoine (Cornell) has undertaken a rather detailed examination of the allegations and the evidence for them; here's his summary with links:

In Trump, Russia and the media – The hacking of the Democratic party and private cybersecurity companies (part 1), Trump, Russia and the media – The administration makes its case and it’s the red scare all over again (part 2), Trump, Russia and the media – The Buzzfeed dossier and the bankruptcy of journalism (part 3) and Trump, Russia and the media – The deep state against Trump and the threat on democracy (part 4), I review the evidence on the various allegations that have been made about the relationship between Trump and Russia, as well as the way in which the media has covered that issue. I conclude that, depending on the allegation, the evidence ranges from weak to completely preposterous. In the process, I document a shocking amount of bias and incompetence on the part of journalists, who clearly aren’t doing their job. The whole thing is more than 16,000 words long and contain 137 hyperlinks, which is why I made it a four-part series of posts. As far as I know, this is by far the most thorough discussion of the allegations that have been made about Trump and Russia out there, which I think is very important because this story is being used to prevent Trump from pursuing a détente with Russia.

I've not read all of this, but what I have read is interesting and usefully documented.  You can comment at Mr. Lemoine's blog on his analysis.  Refreshingly, he writes elsewhere on his blog, "I don’t believe that I should be protected from criticism for what I say by the fact that I’m a graduate student."

U.S. border agents behaving badly

Some of this ugly and stupid behavior is the pleasure in power of petty tyrants in their little bureaucratic realm, otherwise powerless individuals who now find others at their mercy and whim.  But it is surely exacerbated by the signals sent by the Idiot in Chief.   One important takeaway:  academics on tourist visas in the U.S. can receive honoraria.  (Thanks to Benj Helli for one of the pointers.)

I'd be curious to hear what experiences readers may have had coming into the U.S. since Trump took office and began his immigration rampage.

What the research on political leanings in academia actually shows

A useful corrective from IHE to the right-wing blather.   If academics are trying to indoctrinate their students to lean left, on the evidence of the U.S., they're doing a terrible job!

The shadow of the Reichstag fire and the manipulation of the threat of terrorism to undermine democracy

A number of friends and colleagues have been sharing this brief essay from the NYRB.  The Nazi horror looms large over any discussion of fascism/authoritarianism for obvious reasons, and the author is right about the role exploitation of terroristic violence can play in authoritarian reversions, as happened in Nazi Germany.  The essay omits mention of two rather important points, however, about the Nazi experience.   First, the German Constitution had a clause specifically authorizing the suspension of all civil liberties, which was invoked after the Reichstag fire.  The American Constitution has no such general clause, though Congress can suspend the right of habeus corpus (in the face of "rebellion" or "invasion" to protect "public safety"), which would be very serious.  But Congress can not suspend freedom of speech, assembly and the press.  (Note, however, that courts can decide that the state has a compelling reason to violate those individual rights, though it is very rare for them to do so.  But this makes it more cumbersome for a would-be authoritarian to violate civil liberties.)  Second, and this is also crucial, one can not forget the complicity of the German President, Hindenburg, in all this.  For he alone had the stature with the military and the public at large to put a stop to Hitler, yet he aided and abetted Hitler's seizure of power at every turn.  There is no one with similar stature in the American system, and there is every indication that the leading military figures, including those serving under Trump, believe in democracy, unlike Trump. 

Two of my constitutional law colleagues, Tom Ginsburg and Aziz Huq, have examined how constitutional democracies slip into authoritarian regimes in comparative perspective (this is a shorter version of a longer academic paper to which they link in their essay).

PhilSkills: interviews with PhD philosophers who have forged careers outside the academy...

...conducted (mostly) by Eleni Manis.  She writes:

I (Eleni Manis) conducted these interviews after leaving my job as a philosophy professor to work in government and the political arena.  The Phil Skills website was built by Jitendra Subramanyam, a fellow Michigan philosophy PhD who runs his own IT consulting company.  Stephanie Wykstra, who works on open science and data-sharing, contributed two interviews. 

The homepage of the site is here.

Remember John Kasich, the "adult" Republican in last year's contest?

Here's the mischief he's up to in Ohio regarding public education.

(Thanks to Curtis Franks for the pointer to a news story that led me to Diane Ravitch's apt commentary.)

Sunday Classical: Beethoven, "Moonlight Sonata"

It's been a Beethoven kind of week; here's Evgeny Kissin's rendition:

 

 

Great moments in obscure rock 'n' roll: Moby Grape, "Can't Be So Bad," 1968

Moby Grape was the San Francisco/psychedelic band overshadowed by the Jefferrson Airplane, Grateful Dead, and Quicksilver Messenger Service, among others, but they produced two very fine albums in 1967 and 1968 (and to the extent they are remembered it's for this tune from the debut album, "Omaha").  But here's a great number from their second album:

 

 

Western Sydney's Dennis Schmidt interviewed...

...at 3AM.

Trade/mass media publications vs. academic journals

A philosopher at a liberal arts college writes:

How different are the standards for publishing in popular venues and trade publications from the standards for publishing in academic journals? For example, are submissions to multiple venues acceptable if the publication doesn’t explicitly prohibit this? Or do the standards vary too widely for this question to be useful?

One reason I ask is that The Chronicle of Higher Education said in October that they would publish a book review I submitted to them. I waited patiently, inquired a few times, and most recently the editor has said that she thinks the moment of the piece has passed (indeed!). This would never happen in an academic journal. I have little experience publishing in such venues…is this  normal? (I recognize that you might not know because you don’t send out unsolicited work).

Mass media publications, even fairly specialized ones like CHE, are certainly very sensitive to the timing of pieces.  I recently had occasion to send an unsolicited opinion piece about the Supreme Court; I was advised by someone with experience not to  do simultaneous submissions.  I had the advantage of having, through colleagues, an editorial contact at each publication.  The first rejected it (they were deluged with pieces), but did so promptly.  The second newspaper took the piece, but is holding it until the Gorsuch hearings are set to begin.   That seemed smart to me, since the days after his nomination were awash with pieces, and the content of this piece makes it apt for the start of the hearings.  So that is my experience with unsolicited submissions.

But it would be useful to hear from others about their experiences, and their answers to the posed questions.

 

A new publishing scam: International Agency for Development of Culture, Education and Science (IADCES)

Details here.   Note that Philosophy of Science is one of the journals they purport to represent!

How long can romantic love last?

Philosopher Naomi Goulder (New College Humanities, London) and others discuss.

Brian Leiter watch

For our occasional series:  8th-grade science teacher!

"the Lord is my shepherd," Trump style...

...from Garrison Keillor.  (Thanks to Tom Carson for the pointer.)

There is a serious point underlying these parodies:  Trump is barely literate, he makes George W. Bush look like a world-class orator.   Trump is a bad human being, who wants to do many bad things, but those observing him have to resist over-analyzing his oral expressions:   we are dealing with an inept middle school student when it comes to the spoken word.

How many full-time administrative assistants for a philosophy department?

A colleague elsewhere writes:  "We’ve had two full-timer admins for 6 years.  One was assigned centrally to the day-to-day operations of the graduate program.  That admin left for a better paying job, and we were denied a request to hire a replacement.  The Dean’s judgment is that we do not need a second admin."   This philosopher wondered what the norm was.  To make this more concrete, this is a PhD program with about 15 full-time faculty, several lecturers, around 30 PhD students at any given time typically, and not quite 100 undergraduate majors.  For those working in PhD programs, what are the norms where you are--please give rough estimates about the size of the program along the lines of the preceding, as well as noting how much administrative support is available.

Reader poll #5: the readers seeking advice posts

MOVING TO FRONT FROM YESTERDAY--PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO VOTE IF YOU HAVEN'T ALREADY!

These posts vary quite a bit--from students seeking advice about programs and applications, to faculty seeking advice about publishing, and so on.  They've been a feature of the blog going back to near the beginning.  They are also posts that always feature open comment sections, since reader input is being sought.

As a reader of the blog, how important to you are the "readers seeking advice" threads with open comment sections?

Very important, one of the main reasons I read the blog.

 

Important, I enjoy/value these posts.

 

Unimportant, I read the blog for other reasons.

 

 

pollcode.com free polls

UPDATE: So with over 600 votes, here's what readers had to say:

As a reader of the blog, how important to you are the "readers seeking advice" threads with open comment sections?
Selection		Votes
Very important, one of the main reasons I read the blog.	33%	203
Important, I enjoy/value these posts.	41%	253
Unimportant, I read the blog for other reasons.	26%	162
618 total

 

"Bias Response Teams" are a new thing at universities

Here's a compilation of some reported incidents that should be alarming.  One assumes that in most or all these cases there were no repercussions for the speech, but the idea that they would even be reported and scrutinized is bizarre.

"The Innocence of Becoming: Nietzsche Against Guilt"

This is a pretty significant revision of a draft paper I first posted in 2013.  It gives a good bit of attention to the reactive attitude of "revenge" that polite philosophers usually ignore.  The abstract:

This is a substantial revision (especially in its second half) of a paper first posted in 2013. I offer an interpretation of Nietzsche’s striking idea of “the innocence of becoming” (die Unschuld des Werdens), and a partial defense of its import, namely, that no one is ever morally responsible or guilty for what they do and that many of the so-called “reactive attitudes” are misplaced. I focus primarily, though not exclusively, on the arguments as set out in Twilight of the Idols. First, there is Nietzsche’s hypothesis, partly psychological and partly historical or anthropological, that the ideas of “free” action or free will, and of responsibility for actions freely chosen or willed, were introduced primarily in order to justify punishment (“[m]en were considered ‘free’ so that they might be judged and punished”). Call this the Genetic Thesis about Free Will. Second, there is Nietzsche’s claim that the moral psychology, or “psychology of the will” as he calls it, that underlies this picture is, in fact, false — that, in fact, it is not true that every action is willed or that it reflects a purpose or that it originates in consciousness. Call these, in aggregate, the Descriptive Thesis about the Will. (Here I draw on earlier work.) Finally, there is articulation of a programmatic agenda, namely, to restore the “innocence of becoming” by getting rid of guilt and punishment based on guilt — not primarily because ascriptions of guilt and responsibility are false (though they are), but because a world understood as “innocent,” one understood in terms of “natural” cause and effect, is a better world in which to live. I focus in particular on a reactive attitude often ignored by philosophers, but of crucial importance for Nietzsche, namely, revenge. I aim to explain and defend Zarathustra’s recommendation: “Enemy’ you shall say, but not villain; sick you shall say, but not scoundrel; fool you shall say, but not sinner.” Nietzsche’s views are contrasted with those of important modern writers on these topics, especially P.F. Strawson and Derk Pereboom.

 

Does Trump suffer from narcissistic personality disorder?

A psychiatrist responsible for the DSM definition says he does not, but the reasons given are not very good ones.  (See an earlier discussion of this topic here.)  He claims that Trump does not suffer distress and impairment connected to his personality traits (note that the psychiatrist does not deny he manifests those traits).   He appears to confuse the fact that money and lawyers shield him from the worst consequences of his psychological peculiarities with the fact that he does not appear to be severely impaired in his profession.  But the impairment is apparent in other ways:  he doesn't appear to have real human relationships (he's on his third purchased wife), his relations with others are wholly instrumental, and despite inheriting a huge fortune and investing in New York real estate in the 1970s, he was never able to become a real player in the New York real estate market because others avoided him because of his problems.  (This bears emphasizing:  he was never one of the top ten developers in New York, and those folks would not deal with him.  Anyone familiar with the NYC real estate market knows this!)  We have less evidence about the distress he suffers, but it is hard not to interpret the bizarre tweeting and other outbursts as signs of serious distress, which he then tries to mend via public displays of various kinds.

Psychiatry is an epistemically feeble discipline, and the connotations of "mental illness" complicate things further.  Let's drop the question of whether his narcissistic personality disorder is a mental illness.  What's useful about the personality disorders, when they are useful at all, is that they do identify stable patterns of behavior that some people do exemplify.  Trump is one.  Having a narcissistic personality disorder may or may not be incompatible with being President--so far, the evidence is that he's quite impaired in his ability to govern, but that's all to the good given the mischief he would otherwise pursue were he more competent.

Iowa legislature considering bill to require political diversity/balance in faculty hiring

Besides being a massive violation of academic freedom, it's almost certainly unconstitutional for a state university to mandate this kind of political balance (which would require, among other things, an unconstitutional invasion of the privacy of faculty to elicit their political affiliations).  I assume it won't be passed, and that if it is passed, it will be enjoined by a court right away and then struck down.

(Thanks to Michael Swanson for the pointer.)

UPDATE:  More from CHE.  There's already pushback in the legislature on this nonsense.  Apparently the bill would rely only on voter registration records, exempting from consideration those not registered.

Kenneth Arrow, author of the "impossibility theorem," has died

NYT obituary here.  His work on voting and social choice has often attracted the interest of philosophers.  Any suggestions about particularly good or fruitful philosophical treatments of his work?

Ethical issues raised by self-driving cars

This is interesting, and far more real than fantasies about our robot overlords (as opposed to our actual capitalist overlords).   What do readers know about these developments?  (Thanks to Phil Gasper for the pointer.)

A long interview with Martha Nussbaum...

...at Emotion Researcher, partly biographical, and partly about her work on the emotions across many different books.

PhD programs for studying "conservative" philosophy?

A philosopher elsewhere wrote seeking advice for an undergraduate student of hers interested in "conservative" political philosophy, but neither in the libertarian nor Thomist traditions.  She explains:

My student is interested in exploring a kind of conservatism of which Burke is just one example – other examples might be John Kekes, maybe Roger Scruton, John Gray.  His thinking is decidedly anti-liberal, but he is interested in constructive conservative thinking rather than mere anti-liberal critique.  My student’s conservatism is not grounded in religion, so a Catholic-heavy institution might not be the best fit.  Political science programs are not out of the question, but he’d be looking for programs where one can do serious political philosophy.

My sense is there isn't a lot of interest in Burke in philosophy departments with PhD programs, but correct me if I'm mistaken.  Suggestions welcome; signed comments (full name) strongly preferred.  And give some details/reasons, please, for the programs you recommend!

Signs of the times: the declining interest in arts and humanities at liberal arts colleges

A new account at IHE of a familiar trend.   But let's remember the context.  Too bad, though, to see students flocking to the pseudo-science of economics at some colleges.  Let them study real sciences at least!

Is it a cake or a biscuit?

Philosophy to the rescue!

(Thanks to Neil Tennant for the pointer.)

Brown's David Christensen to be 2018 Sanders Lecturer at Eastern APA

The APA announcement here.

Get to know "the enemies of the people"...

...with help from the Dallas News. 

Amateur philosopher on the internet pays professional philosopher $1,000 to review his book...

...and isn't happy with the resulting appraisal of his amateur efforts.  But this is the Age of Trump, so I bet the guy will end up getting the National Humanities Medal anyway!

ADDENDUM: In addition to not being very good at philosophy, our amateur philosopher also appears to be a delusional narcissist.  Yikes!

Reader poll #4: "philosophy in the news" links

 MOVING TO FRONT FROM FRIDAY--THE RESULTS 

As a reader of the blog, how important to you is coverage of "philosophy in the news," e.g., links to interviews with philosophers, popular articles about philosophers or philosophical topics, and the like?

Very important, one of the main reasons I read the blog

 

Important, I like to have these links.

 

Unimportant, I read the blog for other reasons

 

 

pollcode.com free polls

UPDATE: The results:

As a reader of the blog, how important to you is coverage of "philosophy in the news," e.g., links to interviews with philosophers, popular articles about philosophers or philosophical topics, and the like?
Selection		Votes
Very important, one of the main reasons I read the blog	43%	292
Important, I like to have these links.	45%	309
Unimportant, I read the blog for other reasons	12%	84
685 total

Tiny Trump

These are funny.

(Thanks to Katalin Balog for the pointer.)

In Memoriam: Tom Regan (1938-2017)

A moral philosopher, best-known for his defense of animal rights, he was emeritus at North Carolina State University.  There is an informative obituary here.

Billionaire investor recommends liberal arts majors...

...mentioning philosophy, foreign languages, and English.

(Thanks to Michael Swanson for the pointer.)

Sunday Classical: Beethoven, Symphony No. 3, "Eroica"

A lovely performance by the Vienna Philharmonic:

 

 

Great moments in obscure rock 'n' roll: Humble Pie, "As Safe as Yesterday Is," 1969

In 1969, Humble Pie had one quite famous member (guitarist and vocalist Steve Marriott, formerly of the Small Faces) and one later to be very famous member (Peter Frampton), but their debut album, of which is the title song, enjoyed a lukewarm reception (though I commend the whole thing to any fans of this series):

 

 

Brandeis's Berislav Marušić interviewed...

...at 3AM.

What is it like to be a philosopher? Jennifer Saul edition

Here.

Philosophy professor at U of Minnesota/Morris doesn't like illegal immigrants...

...it would appear.   His Facebook remarks are largely factually false, but his ignorant extramural rant is plainly constitutionally protected and so his university has no grounds for sanctioning him, as I trust they will not.  But what a knuckle-head!

O'Connor from Indiana to Baylor

Timothy O'Connor (metaphysics, philosophy of action and mind, philosophy of religion), perhaps best-known as a leading contemporary defender of a libertarian account of free will, has accepted appointment as Distinguished Professor of Philosophy at Baylor University, to begin this fall.  That's a major catch for Baylor.

Hamilton, the musical

Martha Nussbaum (Chicago) and others discuss.

Blast from the past: James Taranto and Cindy Sheehan

Back in 2005.

So right now the United States is a country without a President

Yes, there's someone occupying the office, but he's clueless and is even more out of his depth than George W. Bush, who had at least had some experience in government.  The man occupying the office occasionally does things when instructed.   Fortunately, there are a few adults around who have had real jobs and performed them professionally, like General Mattis, the Secretary of Defense, and Rex Tillerson, the Secretary of State.   Even the Vice-President, the otherwise morally abhorrent Mike Pence, actually governed a state, and got in trouble because of his bigotry, not because of sheer incompetence.  The interesting thing is that it turns out the country, and the vast federal bureaucracy, can chug along despite not having a President.   For how long though?  I guess we're going to find out.

Reader poll about blog content #3: political commentary and links

MOVING TO FRONT FROM YESTERDAY:  PLEASE VOTE, IF YOU HAVEN'T, I'LL LET THIS RUN THROUGH THE EVENING

As a reader of the blog, how important to you is political commentary and related links?

Very important, one of the main reasons I read the blog

 

Importnat, I like/enjoy the political commentary and related links

 

Unimportant, I read the blog for other reasons

 

 

pollcode.com free polls

UPDATE: So with over 900 votes, here are the results:

As a reader of the blog, how important to you is political commentary and related links?   Selection   Votes  Very important, one of the main reasons I read the blog  29% 267  Importnat, I like/enjoy the political commentary and related links  33% 306  Unimportant, I read the blog for other reasons  39% 363  936 total

This is useful information me--there is a higher level of interest in the political blogging than I would have anticipated. I trust those with no interest in that find it easy enough to skip or ignore it.

PhD admission offers will be coming out shortly...

...so just a reminder, all the links for the PGR, 2016-17 (sort of) are here.  Good luck to all applicants!

Free on-line philosophy courses

Longtime reader Robert McGarvey calls my attention to this site which collects free on-line courses, including several by notable philosophers, including:

"Effective Altruism" with Peter Singer (Princeton)

"Ethics of Eating" with Andrew Chignell (Cornell, moving to Penn) and William Starr (Cornell)

"Paradox and Infinity" with Agustin Rayo (MIT)

"Minds and Machines" with Alex Byrne (MIT)

"Aristotle and His Successors" with Susan Sauve Meyer (Penn)

A federal court finds that Trump's immigration order was motivated by anti-Muslim animus...

...which now could significantly hamper the Idiot-in-Chief's future actions (we may hope!).

Harvard reducing PhD admissions (across the board)...

...due to negative returns on its endowment in the last year.   Most large university endowments declined last year, though Harvard's decline was on the higher end (over 5%), compared to a loss of about 2,5% for Princeton and a gain of almost 1% for Stanford's.  At the further extremes, Penn's endowment increased nearly 6% last year, while Chicago's (sad to say) declined more than 7%!

Judge Robart in Seattle to government lawyer: Didn't POTUS say "see you in court"?

This was predictable, the more the Idiot-in-Chief mouths off at judges, the more it will come back to haunt him.

The worst and the dumbest...

...one down.