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:
Now wait, you're the 'hahaha' guy, surely you had some examples in mind? Didn't you?
Surely many philosophers' opinions are worth more than those of one grad student in a poorly ranked program.
Calgary is a good program, not poorly ranked. But I would have thought someone who laughed at the idea that the PGR evaluates quality not quantity of philosophers in an area would have had some examples in mind that he would defend.
Look, I realize this is Twitter and perhaps you were blowing smoke and don't actually have any examples of the PGR not evaluating faculty quality--that's OK, but then you should say so.
I don't have specific examples to mind, and I am on transit atm, but I can think of plenty of philosophers who are highly regarded, but poor colleagues /supervisors etc. Also plenty of younger faculty who are better than the old guard.
The PGR doesn't claim that the best philosophers are the best advisors, indeed, warns studnets about that. Indeed, today I posted about that precise topic. Again, let's have actual cases, otherwise this isn't helpful for students.
I can't be bothered to go look at the thing again, tbh. I just think the link between reputation and quality of philosophy/quality of grad program is extremely tenuous.
Good, as I suspected you have a prejudice but no evidence!
-
New conversation
Well, no evidence other than the general consensus that the methodology is deeply flawed, and that the PGR serves to maintain traditional hegemonic structures.
"General consensus." If I may quote you: hahahahaha. You may be confusing the noisy rabble on social media with the actual professional consensus.
-
-
End of conversation
-
Replying to @BrianLeiter @A_Thomas_Bolduc
What else could he have? He is no eye turned in no particular direction!
Recent Comments