Leiter Reports: A Philosophy Blog

Great Obscure Rock 'n' Roll Albums: Leaf Hound, "Growers of Mushroom," 1971

In the annals of great unrecognized rock classics, none is greater than Leaf Hound's one and only 1971 album, which, happily, has found a new audience in recent years.  This is a gem from start to finish for fans of the hard rock/blues genre that Led Zeppelin made most famous:

 

New Books in March

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

Debating Humanitarian Intervention:  Should We Try to Save Strangers? by Fernando R. Teson & Bas van der Vossen (Oxford University Press, 2017).

Speak Freely:  Why Universities Must Defend Free Speech by Keith Whittington (Princeton University Press, 2018).

The Nietzschean Mind edited by Paul Katsafanas (Routledge, 2018).

Happiness is the Wrong Metric:  A Liberal Communitarian Response to Populism by Amitai Etzioni (Springer Open, 2018).

Aristotle, Physics trans. with introduction and notes by C.D.C. Reeve (Hackett, 2018).

Plotinus, Ennead I.1:  What is the Living Thing?  What is Man? trans. with introduction and notes by Gerard O'Daly (Parmenides Publishing, 2017).

Plotinus, Ennead V.8:  On Intelligible Beauty trans. with introduction and notes by Andrew Smith (Parmenides Publishing, 2017).

Science as Social Existence:  Heidegger and the Sociology of Scientific Knowledge by Jeff Kochan (Open Book Publishers, 2017).

Reading's Emma Borg interviewed...

...at 3AM.

Philosophy is good for capitalism...

...so it must have value after all (an on-going series).

(Thanks to Courtney Cox for the pointer.)

On 'celebrity' scientists

Philosopher Philip Kitcher (Columbia) comments.

In Memoriam: Moishe Postone (1942-2018)

The distinguished Marxist historian and social theorist, whose work is of great significance for philosophers interested in Marx as well, has died.  I will add links to other memorial notices as they appear.

What is it like to be a philosopher? Christian Miller edition

Here.

Julia Kristeva, collaborator with the Bulgarian secret police in 1971

Curious.  My opinion of Kristeva is already so low I'm not sure this moves the dial much, though it certainly introduces another kind of consideration--beyond the one Jon Elster adduced--for thinking poorly of her:  "rubbish" work plus collaboration with fascists.

(Thanks to several readers for passing this on.)

UPDATE:  Kristeva denies the allegations (about working with the Bulgarian secret police, that is, not about her work being "rubbish"!).

Philosophical Gourmet Report in the real world

LSE for example.

Repeal the Second Amendment, says retired Justice Stevens

A good idea.  It's an anomaly among world constitutions and a relic of the past.   I've no doubt people would still be able to own hunting rifles and, in some parts of the country, handguns, but civilized gun control measures would be easy without endless court battles over a fraudulent interpretation of the constitution.

Is Philosophy & Public Affairs really the "Oxford-Princeton-Harvard Nepotistic Journal of Reasonableness Studies"?

Someone, who definitely did not want credit, just e-mailed me this, which he said is making the rounds on Facebook.  Let's hope Prof. Satz changes things so much that even that joke won't get traction anymore.

Stoics persuade Senator Rubio of Florida as to importance of philosophy

Go figure.

PGR haters seem more unhinged this time around

I assume it's because the fake 2014 controversy failed to derail the PGR as intended:  not only did the 2014 PGR appear, the 2017 PGR has appeared, and with even higher rates of participation (and Wiley-Blackwell has even contracted for two more iterations over the next six or seven years).   So this is obviously frustrating to the self-serving liars who would benefit from the PGR going away.  Even more aggravating for the haters, I suspect, is that none of the "suggestions" made for changing the PGR were taken, exactly as I  predicted some time ago.   An indication of their disconnect from reality is that Brian "I make things up" Bruya recently surfaced on social media to declare that having been exposed as an incompetent fraud was actually a 'badge of honor" proving the soundness of his criticisms of the PGR!  On Twitter--the ideal forum for blowing smoke--Aaron Thomas-Bolduc from the University of Calgary replied to my tweet that the PGR measures quality not quantity (in response to someone who thought the more "specialists" in an area the more deserving the program of accolades) with an incisive "hahahahaha."  When asked, however, to name the programs that had not been correctly evaluated in terms of their quality, he could not name any.  For those who want to be amused, I post the exchange below the break: 

Web of Science's "global reputation" surveys

These are much better done than the Quirky Silliness rankings, though not as detailed in the published results (there is on separate philosophy listing).  See also the discussion of the University of Tokyo, which highlights the perils of world reputation surveys.

Philosopher Andy Clark (Edinburgh) profiled...

...in The New Yorker.

Trump takes out Craiglist ad in search of legal counsel

Very funny.

(Thanks to David Zimmerman for the pointer.)

Stanford's Debra Satz to be the new editor of...

...Philosophy & Public Affairs.  I am hopeful she'll broaden the journal's scope beyond "the usual suspects" in the Kant and Rawls mafias.

Facebook, Google, and the threat to our freedom

Philip Pettit (Princeton/ANU) comments.

PhilJobs is starting to fill up with junior appointments news

Here.

Want to be virtuous? Get a blood test

Aristotle's view:

Because moral virtues such as courage and moderation develop out of our natural character traits, which are largely the result of our physiology, which rests ultimately on the material composition of our blood, moral virtue has its origin in blood. If you have the right kind of blood — i.e., hot and thin, like that of Greek men — your chances of achieving moral virtue are good. If you don’t — if your blood is hot and thick, like that of the spirited but stupid northern barbarians, or cold and thin, like that of the cowardly but intelligent southern barbarians, or, worst of all, cold and thick, like that of women, who are naturally cowardly and stupid — your chances of achieving virtue are slim. Furthermore, since the composition of one’s blood is determined partly by environment, including climate, where you live has a significant impact on your chances of achieving moral virtue. It turns out, then, that there are, for Aristotle, what Leunissen calls ‘morally unlucky groups’ who have little to no chance of achieving moral virtue and living happy, flourishing lives. It turns out, in other words, that whether one becomes virtuous and happy is largely a matter of luck. Significantly, women, barbarians, and ‘natural slaves’ are among these morally unlucky groups. Full moral virtue is for free-born, male Greek citizens alone. For just about everyone else, bad luck.

O'Connor from Baylor back to Indiana

Timothy O'Connor, a leading defender of libertarianism about free will, has decided to return to the Department of Philosophy at Indiana University, Bloomington, after a year at Baylor University.  Note that Prof. O'Connor was not on the Indiana faculty list for the 2017-18 PGR.

Matherne from UC Santa Cruz to Harvard

Samantha Matherne (Kant, NeoKantianism, phenomenology, aesthetics), currently Assistant Professor of Philosophy at the University of California at Santa Cruz has accepted a tenure-track offer from Harvard University, starting this fall; she took her PhD in philosophy from UC Riverside.  (Prof. Matherne is also writing the book on Cassirer in my Routledge Philosophers series.)

Deciding Between Admissions Offers: The Importance of Visiting/Talking With Current Students

MOVING TO FRONT FROM LAST YEAR (SINCE TIMELY AGAIN--originally posted March 6, 2009)

Applicants to PhD and MA programs are now receiving offers of admission and, if they are lucky, are beginning to weigh choices between different departments.  I want to reiterate a point made in the PGR, namely, that students are well-advised to talk to current students at the programs they are considering.   There are often things you will want to know that you won't glean from familiarity with the excellence of the faculty's work, even if that remains the most important, if defeasible, reason for choosing a particular department.  Here are some examples of information that no ranking, no departmental brochure, and no "official" departmental representive will tell you about; all of these are drawn from stories I've heard from students over the last few years about ranked departments (the departments will remain unnamed, obviously).  You can think of them as representing "types" of problems you should be aware of before enrolling.  I've tweaked some of the details to protect identities.

The Absent Faculty:  Are the faculty who look so good on paper actually around and interested in working with students?  I heard a story about a key senior person in one department who is an alcoholic, and who simply ignored his students.  In another department, almost all the graduate students had to sign an open letter to the faculty a number of years ago protesting the failure of faculty to return graded papers and their general lack of interest in mentoring the students.   In yet another department, a well-known senior member of the faculty spent so much time travelling and lecturing around the world, that he rarely had time to review or discuss work carefully with students. 

The Sexual Predator Faculty:  Are women treated as young philosophers and aspiring professionals, or do faculty regularly view them as a potential source for dates and sexual liasons?  It's a bit shocking to realize that this is still a live issue in some departments, but, sadly, it is.  Are faculty-student sexual relations common in the department?  What happens when the relations end?  Are there repeated cases of sexual harassment complaints against faculty in the department?  Do they ever result in discipline?  I suppose it is possible this could be an issue for male students, but all the reports I've gotten over the years have been from women victimized by male faculty. 

The Nasty Faculty:  Talented philosophers and scholars often differ, dramatically, in how pleasant they are personally and professionally.  I recall the story of one department where a member of the faculty was known to reduce students to tears in seminar.  In another department, a faculty member regularly refuses to work with students, even those interested in his areas; he works only with those he deems "worthy," and there are not many of them!  In another department, faculty openly express doubts about the competence of the graduate students and their ability.  Make sure the philosophers who seem most interesting to you don't fall into these categories!

The Factionalized Faculty:  Many faculties are "factionalized," in the sense that there are sub-groups that rarely see "eye to eye" about departmental issues, from appointments to admissions.  Where this becomes worrisome, though, for a prospective student is when certain members of the faculty who share interests and approaches control all the key resources--fellowships, resources for speakers etc.--and use that control to define "in" and "out" groups of faculty and students:  students with the "wrong" philosophical interests or who express an interest in the "wrong" faculty members are denied access to important perks and support.  This kind of ugly factionalization is less common, but it exists. 

I wish it were possible to meaningfuly measure and evaluate faculties along these important dimensions, but, alas, it is not.  I have no doubt there are many programs that are really exceptional for how pleasant they are as places to do graduate study, and the way for a prospective student to discover them is to talk to lots of current students.

Good luck with your decisions!

Breaking news: philosophers from unranked programs in their specialties think the PGR is...

..."unreliable," "weird," "misleading."  I gather a team of crack psychologists is working on a study to try to explain what's going on here.  It is mysterious.

Great Obscure Rock 'n' Roll Albums, Masters Apprentices, "Choice Cuts," 1971

The second remarkable album in our new series of obscure rock albums that somehow never made it into the "canon."  We've noted this Australian band before, but their entire 1971 album repays many listenings: 

 

Washington's Benjamin Feintzeig interviewed...

...at 3AM.

Memory and responsibility for wrongdoing

Philosopher Helen Beebee (Manchester) discusses.

Dr. Seuss on getting tenure

Cute.

New federal budget in US increases spending on education, including higher education

IHE has the breakdown.

The "fascist mysticism" of Jordan Peterson

An amusing review of this world-historical simpleton who read Jung and never came back.

(Thanks to David Zimmerman for the pointer.)

Gutting on Pinker

A typically fair-minded takedown by Gary Gutting (Notre Dame) of the "public intellectual" blowhard du jour.

Blast from the past: the first five laws of cyber-dynamics

From 2015. As true today as then.

Hypocrisy watch: the case of Bari Weiss

Typical NY Times.

Mathematical logician Saharon Shelah (Hebrew U) wins 2018 Schock Prize in "Logic and Philosophy"

Announcement here.

19th-century Continental philosophy in the new PGR

The PGR has always given substantial attention to the Continental traditions in post-Kantian philosophy, reporting, much to the self-interested consternation of those affected, the generally low opinion philosophers hold of the SPEP departments that would like to maintain an exclusive claim to these areas.  But the SPEP partisans are tireless in promoting the canard that the PGR neglects the Continental traditions, even though it is obvious to anyone who looks that the reverse is the case.

This year, we had a large and diverse grew of evaluators for 19th-century Continental philosophy; I've added their institutional affiliation:  Mark Alznauer (Northwestern), Jessica Berry (Georgia State), Lee Braver (South Florida), Taylor Carman (Barnard/Columbia), Maudemarie Clark (UC Riverside), Steven Crowell (Rice), Sebastian Gardner (UCL), Ken Gemes (Birkbeck), Gary Gutting (Notre Dame), Paul Guyer (Brown), Michael Hardimon (UC San Diego), Stephen Houlgate (Warwick), Andrew Huddleston (Birkbeck), Scott Jenkins (Kansas), Peter Kail (Oxford), Paul Katsafanas (BU), Pierre Keller (UC Riverside), Brian Leiter (Chicago), Yitzhak Melamed (Johns Hopkins), Dean Moyar (Johns Hopkins), Andreja Novakovic (UC Riverside), Brian O’Connor (Univ College Dublin), Michael Rosen (Harvard), Iain Thomson (New Mexico), Somogy Varga (Memphis), Georgia Warnke (UC Riverside), Eric Watkins (UC San Diego), Allen Wood (Indiana), Mark Wrathall (Oxford).

Probably the biggest divide among scholars who work on 19th-century Continental philosophy is between those whose focus is primarily on German Idealism, and those whose focus is more on Schopenhauer and Nietzsche.  Fortunately, we had a good mix here:  in the former group, we have Alznauer, Gardner, Guyer, Houlgate, Keller, Melamed, Moyar, Novakovic, Rosen, Watkins, and Wood, among others; in the latter group, Clark, Gemes, Huddleston, and Kail, among others.  And several evaluators cut across these figures (e.g., Braver, Jenkins, Hardimon, among others). 

Below the fold, the results followed by some comments:

Stubblefield sexual assault case comes to end

Anna Stubblefield has pled guilty to a lesser sexual assault charge in return for a lighter prison sentence.  Since Stubblefield, like her mother, appears to be a "true believer" in facilitated communication, I expect this is not the last we will hear from her:  see the comments by psychologist James Todd in the update here.

ADDENDUM:  Jeff McMahan (Oxford) tells me that Stubblefield is likely to be sentenced to time already served, given the several years she has already been in custody.

"Responsibility without blame"

An e-learning project, courtesy of philosopher Hanna Pickard (Birmingham), aimed at the general public, rather than philosophers (though philosophers unfamiliar with the research may also find it of interest).

Kant in the new PGR

The Kant evaluators were a mix of leading figures in Kant studies (e.g., Guyer, Keller, Pereboom, Proops, Watkins, Wood, among others) and leading historians of modern philosophy whose work intersects with Kant (e.g., Clark, Garber, McCann, Rosen, among others).

The results, below the fold, are followed by some comments:

Hartry Field (NYU) to be the 2018-19 Romanell Lecturer

The APA announcement is here.

Stockholm's Greg Bognar interviewed...

...at 3AM.

UCU (the union of academic staff in the UK) calls on external examiners to give notice and resign until the strike is settled

Details here.

Great Obscure Rock 'n' Roll Albums: Farm, "Farm," 1971

Over the next few weeks, I want to feature a few obscure rock 'n' roll albums rather than simply individual numbers; these are cases where the entire album is well-conceived and played, so much so that it's surprising it isn't part of the "classic rock" canon.  Farm was a Southern Illinois rock band in the style of the Allmann Brothers and Canned Heat.   Their one and only album is a tour de force from start to the spectacular "Let That Boy Boogie" finish:

 

A pretty good one paragraph summary of my 50-minute podcast on Marx

Here.  It's nice to see how much attention this has gotten in cyberspace.

Stockholm's Asa Burman interviewed...

...at 3AM.

What is it like to be a philosopher? J.D. Trout edition

Here,  courtesy, as always, of Clifford Sosis.  I've been a fan of Professor Trout's work for a long time, but this interview was a real eye-opener about his life and career trajectory.  This observation of his is timely about his undergrad days at Bucknell:

The philosophy department at Bucknell back then was small, and mainly devoted to teaching. As devoted as the faculty members were, they didn’t stay in touch with professional movements in the field, and had little idea of what the good departments were in the country. So I didn’t have much guidance on that score. When I was considering grad school, in the early 1980s, the truly distinguished liberal arts colleges had drawn their faculty from truly distinguished graduate programs. And the advice they gave was regulated accordingly. Take one step away from those colleges, though, and a capable kid with a serious interest in philosophy could be at sea, relying on faculty advice that was impressionistic, outdated or hopelessly idiosyncratic. If there had been a Philosophical Gourmet Report back then – a real service to many thousands of young people over the years in precisely my position – I would have been spared a nearly abortive year of graduate work at Boston University. (I say ‘nearly’, because Louise Antony and Joe Levine were passing through BU at the time, and they were wonderful mentors that year.) I loved living in Boston.

And I got a kick out of this line:

Do any trends concern you?

The only distinctively philosophical trend that concerns me is the persistent anti-naturalism in traditional Philosophy departments. All of the other trends that concern me in philosophy are shared by many other disciplines, particularly in the Humanities – their proneness to fetishize cultural identity, their celebration of detachment from practical concerns, their constant alertness to, and search for, insult to their sensibilities, etc.

Amen to all that.

Four traits of successful teachers

This is a perceptive essay.  It omits one bit of advice my father gave me a long time ago (he had taught in the NYC public schools at various levels, including high school, for many years):  "Never assume."   Of course, you have to assume some things (e.g., that the students understand the meaning of many words), but too many teachers make assumptions about concepts and ideas that they take for granted, but those seeking to learn often do not yet grasp (and even if they do, there is rarely harm in revisiting them for reinforcement).

"Academic Freedom and the Obligations of University Administrators" regarding faculty speech in particular

A talk I gave last fall at Columbia Law School is now on-line, for those who might be interested.

Blast from the past: Perspective on the PGR from a PhD student

Back in 2014, but as timely as ever.

Galen Strawson on "the Great Silliness"

An enjoyable and provocative read, but is it fair to the consciousness "deniers"?  What say you knowledgeable readers?

Does the gender of the evaluators affect PGR results?

No.  In the various studies of prior iterations of the report, no gender effect has ever been found.  I would be surprised if that were different this time.  Some areas of specialization do affect the overall results (e.g., those who do 20th-century Continental or philosophy of language tend to overvalue those areas in doing the overall assessments).  Despite that, in every past iteration of the PGR, and I am pretty sure in this new one (2017-18) too, women are invited to be evaluators at a higher rate than men (relative to their numbers in the profession).  Although I do not know the results for this year, I do know that in past years, women tended to decline the invitation at a slightly higher rate than men.