I confess I shouldn't be surprised any longer by what the PGR/Leiter haters pretend to be concerned about, but this one really does amaze me. So let me spell it out for the benefit of those who genuinely don't understand. Since many readers are not interested in the philosophy rankings, I put all this below the fold.
First, when I retired from the PGR after the 25th year edition in 2014, I made it absolutely clear that PGR-related business would continue to appear here, either under my name or from the editors.
Second, since this blog has tens of thousands of philosophy-interested readers, it is a very efficient way to reach the intended audience with PGR news and updates. There is no reason to set up another blog, that would be active just once every three years, when the PGR editors have easy access to an established forum.
Third--and this, of course, is what this is really about--some think that the outcome of the 2014 campaign to take down the PGR means I should not be using the blog for PGR stuff. As I wrote after the 2017 PGR came out (but I guess some folks need reminding):
I did not step down as editor of the 2014 philosophy Report [as the initial petition, predicated on fraudulent allegations, demanded]. I had told friends and colleagues for some time that 2014—the 25th anniversary edition of the Report—would be the last I was going to produce, and since I had been preparing for three years for the 2014 Report and did not want that work to go to waste due to a fake controversy, I agreed to turn over the work for subsequent rankings to the co-editor of the 2014 ranking and another co-editor that we would agree upon as suitable (that became Christopher Pynes)....
As I've noted previously, my agreement to turn over the Report to other editors (above) has no legal or moral force, since it was obtained through coercive and dishonest means.
As I also noted in 2015, after the completion of the 2014 PGR (with my excellent co-editor Brit Brogaard) and after an effort to appoint a new co-editor had just failed:
I should acknowledge that Brit had asked me to consider continuing as co-editor, but I declined. I would not have agreed to step down last fall just because of the irrational cyber-mob incited by miscreants and dissemblers. As I remarked last fall (and before), I have done the PGR for 25 years, and I no longer have the time or energy for it: I have other work I want to do now. I wanted to get the 2014 PGR out given the strong student interest, and Brit graciously stepped up to make that happen.
Amusingly, Facebook recently "reminded" me of this FB post from 2013:
One of my FB friends had a funny rejoinder: "No one is bulletproof like BL. Sure, there are philosophers who are insensitive -- they don't notice the bullets. But Brian catches them in his teeth and fires them back ...."
Jokes aside, it really is remarkable to witness the displays of ingratitude on social media for the unbelievably hard work the editors (and all the evaluators) put in to produce the latest version of the PGR; the contempt that established faculty openly display for the needs of undergraduate students; and the self-serving lies faculty tell (e.g., students know which programs are good; the PGR failed to recognize [my excellent] program, therefore it's unreliable). I suggested to Professor Pynes recently that, given how noisy the Twitter aggrieved are, it would be good to prepare a dedicated website with all the messages of appreciation from those who have actually used the report. I have by now hundreds of emails like this, and I have occassionaly shared some on the blog, but it would be good to put them all out there, lest students be misled by the self-serving liars on social media.
Recent Comments