I characterized the AAP response as "tepid," but philosopher John Schwenkler (Florida State) wrote me with a more critical take, which he kindly gave permission to share:
It is not "tepid" -- rather it's effectively a slander of our colleague. The first paragraph begins by indicating that she wasn't important enough to have been invited by the society, and ends by implying that her positions "conflict with [the AAP's] commitment to support diversity in philosophy". And then in the second paragraph there's a clear suggestion that allowing someone like Holly to speak freely "conflict[s] with the aim of creating a space where everyone is able to participate". Both of the latter claims are ludicrous.
Recent Comments