Leiter Reports: A Philosophy Blog

14th anniversary post

I first posted on this blog on this day 14 years ago.  My reflections on the 10th anniversary of the blog remain apt.

Following a suggestion of a reader earlier in the summer, when my reduced summer blogging began, I thought I'd list a few things I'm glad to have accomplished with the blog over the years.

1.  In 2009, I shone the first very public light on the sexual harassment problem in philosophy in advice to prospective students--this was before any of the now notorious cases made the headlines, and the topic had been for too long a matter of sotto voce discussion.  I heard from many faculty and students that they were glad for the attention given to this and the warning.

2,  I helped support the movement for the APA to really enforce its existing policies against anti-gay discrimination--it started with this post in 2007, but really took off after this post and the subsequent petition.  See also here and here .

3.  When administrators at King's College, London threatened to fire senior philosophy faculty back in 2010, I hammered away at the misconduct by the administration, making what was transpiring an international issue, which apparently took the administrators completely by surprise, but contributed to the happy ending as I heard from faculty there.

4.  In 2011, when Linda Alcoff and colleagues tried to smear various "analytic" departments as inhospitable to women, I hammered away at this fraud (including coverage of how Alcoff and friends recommended programs with known sexual harassment problems!) and covered all the absurd machinations of these dissemblers, until they finally fell silent, without apologies or mea culpas.

5.   When Dickinson College tried to wrongfully terminate tenured philosopher Crispin Sartwell, I helped find him a lawyer and raise funds for his legal remedies and he was, happily, reinstated, a significant triumph of law over administrative malfeasance.

6.   When the philosophy profession collapsed into madness in 2014, I stood up then, and since, for fair process and freedom of expression and thought, as well as subjecting to scrutiny topics others would rather ignore, and calling out dangerous or foolish  proposals by individuals, and by the APA .  Way back in 2003, I would never have guessed that it would be necessary to stand up for the core values of academic life and scholarly inquiry in the philosophy profession, but that's where we have arrived, alas.

7.  Related to #6, I have also been glad to stand up consistently for academic freedom in cases ranging from John Yoo to Steven Salaita to Lawrence Torcello, as well as to defend authors against editorial misconduct, whether by Synthese or by Hypatia. 

This anniversary also seems like an apt time to reflect on how the philosophy blogosphere has evolved, since it has both exploded and then contracted since I started posting back in August 2003. 

Reader mail

Haven't run one of these in awhile, but I got this nice note last week from a younger philosopher who had written me with a news tip:

By the way, I think your blog is great.  This is not a new sentiment of mine, but I just thought I’d pass it along given this opportunity.  I admire your intellectual and emotional honesty, even in the face of some rather aggressive sanctimonious witch hunts.  And not to mention, I find myself in agreement with most of your views.  Nevertheless, the former stands even when the latter does not hold.    

New personal homepage

I've got a new personal homepage, courtesy of graphic designer Patrick Hennessey.  If you like his work for academic homepages (see also Monique Wonderly's page, which he also designed), consider hiring him:  more information, including contact information here.

My reduced summer blogging schedule...

...announced here begins today.   Berit Brogaard and Christopher Pynes, who both have posting privileges here, are likely to be posting PGR-related items throughout the summer as well.

Summer blogging hiatus, revised

Back in early January, I announced an intention not to blog this summer.  I heard from a lot of unhappy and/or concerned readers about this!  This response from a philosopher elsewhere--whom I've never met (that I can recall), though I have admired her work for a long time, so it was especially nice to hear from her--is representative:

I just wanted to write a quick note, since I know (from your remarks this morning on your blog) that you are reassessing things. I wanted to say how valuable and positive your blog has been for me personally. It's the only one I've ever read (literally, the only one i have bookmarked and the only one i can remember actually logging onto, aside from a few physics things, for special reasons). I know you hear from lots of folks, but I'll miss it if you don't post regularly. There's lots of folks like me, I expect.

Others were unhappy at the prospect that the only audible "voices" in the philosophy blogosphere would be that of the New Infantilists, the politeness police, the thought police, etc.  In any case, I've decided on a somewhat revised summer plan:  I will plan on posting some material on Mondays and Fridays during the summer, perhaps more often when warranted.  I may also invite some guest-bloggers to contribute.  Summer advertising rates will be, accordingly, cut in half:  top spots will be $350, 2nd from the top $300, and 3rd from the top $250 per month.

Thanks to all who wrote to me and to all who read!

Brian Leiter watch

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

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

 

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

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.

Reader poll about blog content #2: academic freedom coverage

As a reader of the blog, how important to you is coverage of and commentary on academic freedom issues?

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

 

Important, I like to read this coverage and commentary

 

Unimportant, I read the blog for other reasons

 

 

pollcode.com free polls

UPDATE:  So this poll has been running for a bit more than 24 hours, and the results are instructive.  I did not realize how much interest there was among readers in academic freedom issues! 

As a reader of the blog, how important to you is coverage of and commentary on academic freedom issues?
Selection		Votes
Very important, one of the main reasons I read the blog	38%	289
Important, I like to read this coverage and commentary	47%	359
Unimportant, I read the blog for other reasons	15%	118
766 total

 

Reader poll about blog content going forward #1

As I mentioned awhile back, I am going to be polling the readership to get a sense of which content is particularly important to readers.  This first poll concerns postings about "faculty news," such as hires, moves, awards and the like.  (There will be a separate poll for links to articles by philosophers, interviews with philosophers etc.--this poll just concerns things like who is moving from where to where, who is retiring, who received an important prize etc.)   My old polling service seems to have disappeared from the web, so I'm trying a new service for this first one. 

 

As a reader of the blog, how important to you is news about faculty, such as hires, retirements, lateral moves, and faculty awards and recognition?

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

 

Important, I like to have this information

 

Unimportant, I read the blog for other reasons

 

 

pollcode.com free polls

 

UPDATE:  So over 700 readers voted during the last 12 hours (you other 8-9,000 free riders still have a chance!), and here's the results:

Selection		Votes
Very important, one of the main reasons I read the blog	36%	256
Important, I like to have this information	36%	261
Unimportant, I read the blog for other reasons	28%	201
718 total

I'll let this run another day, but this is a useful response, confirming what I suspected based on earlier polls about how many readers were in academic philosophy, and how many not.  Thanks!

I answer "Ten Questions"...

...at Law360.com.

 

Brian Leiter watch

An occasional series:  Brian Leiter, cross-country coach.

Academic fields of readers

So with over 1100 votes in our poll from the other day, here are the results:

Readers: what is your main academic field?

Philosophy               62% Law    5% Medicine    1% History    1% English/Comparative Literature/Foreign Languages    3% Theology or Religious Studies    1% Psychology or Cognitive Science    1% Political Science or Public Policy    2% Economics    1% Linguistics    1% Other social sciences (e.g., sociology, anthropology etc.)    1% Biology    1% Mathematics    1% Computer Science    1% Other natural sciences (e.g., chemistry, physics, earth sciences)    1% None of the above    3% I am not an academic    14%

Unsurprisingly, philosophy was the primary academic field of readers (with over 700 votes, accounting for not quite two-thirds of the responses).   5% come from law (59 votes), while 14% are neither faculty nor students (135 votes).   3% (33 votes) study or teach English, Comparative Literature or foreign languages & literatures, while 2% (28) come from Political Science or Public Policy.  The 1% in many other fields conceals differentials in vote totals, ranging from 17 votes in each of History, Medicine, and Psychology/Cognitive Science, to just 6 in Computer Science.  I'm pleased that the blog is of interest to a significant number from other academic disciplines, as well as to those outside the academy.

Thanks to all for reading!

Reader poll: what is your primary academic field?

MOVING TO FRONT FROM YESTERDAY:  IF YOU HAVE NOT YET RESPONDED, PLEASE DO!

I haven't done one of these since early in 2015, so here goes (if you are neither a faculty member nor a student, then choose "I am not an academic"):

 

Customer Satisfaction Surveys

 

2016-17 schedule of talks and workshops

It's now on-line, and will be taking me to to the cities/towns of Hamilton, Vienna, Belgrade, Toronto, Syracuse, Tel-Aviv, Haifa, Jerusalem, Durham (North Carolina), Iowa City, and Ann Arbor, among other places--sometimes to law faculties, sometimes to philosophy, sometimes both.   I look forward to meeting readers I may not have met previously!  Please introduce yourselves.

Religion, Nietzsche, blogging and the PGR

A couple of weeks back, I had the privilege of visiting Springfield, Missouri, for a public lecture on "Why Tolerate Religion?", and then meetings with students at the three colleges there:  Missouri State University; Drury University; and Evangel University.  (As a sidenote, it was the Templeton Foundation and the Institute for Humane Studies that made my visit possible, plus the excellent organizing of Prof. Brandon Schmidly from Evangel.  And if you're in Springfield, make sure to go to Bruno's, great linguine & clams, and apparently everybody else enjoyed their pizzas, calzones etc. [thanks to Daniel Kaufman from MSU for taking us there!].)

In any case, Prof. Schmidly has now made available a video of the public lecture, as well as a video in two parts in which he interviewed me (part 1 is mainly about philosophy, part 2 about the PGR and blogging).

On the radio in Los Angeles tomorrow, Saturday, June 18

I'll be on Gurvey's Law  tomorrow (Saturday) from 2-3 pm Pacific time, 790 KABC talk radio.  Not sure whether it is live-streamed.  I had an enjoyable conversation with Mr. Gurvey, who studied philosophy as an undergraduate Brown (wrote a senior thesis with Dan Brock I learned on omissions and consequentialism) before becoming a lawyer.  We cover a lot of territory, from Nietzsche to legal positivism and more.

Three cultures of Facebook

On Facebook, I've got, broadly speaking, three "kinds" of friends:  academic lawyers, academic philosophers, and regular people (the latter category including some lawyers, relatives, neighbors etc.).   The FB habits of these three groups are strikingly different. 

Regular people use FB the way I thought it was supposed to be used (and the reason I joined):  to post photos of kids and pets, recent vacations, occasionally a bit of personal or professional news.   Academic philosophers do a little of that, and so do academic lawyers, but for most of them, that's only a small portion of their posting.

Academic philosophers increasingly treat FB like a blog, a forum for pontification about everything from real politics to academic politics.  Until I realized I could "unfollow" people without "unfriending" them, I dumped a fair number of academic philosophers because their pontifications were so tiresome.  My advice:  get a blog!  Anyone who wants to read me pontificating, can come here, but I don't impose it on my FB friends. 

Academic lawyers do a fair bit of pontificating too, though not nearly as much as the academic philosophers, and theirs is almost always confined to real politics.  The really revolting aspect of some academic philosopher behavior on FB is its "high school with tenure" quality:  back-stabbing, preening and posturing, endless displays of righteousness and "pearl clutching", faux solidarity with all the oppressed and "wretched of the academy" (less often the actual wretched of the earth), and so on.   An awful lot of academic philosophers on FB come across as teenagers desperately seeking approval and affirmation.  I've managed to "unfriend" most of the offenders, but it was really a kind of depressing and sickening spectacle while it lasted.

Blast from the past: reflections on the 10th anniversary of the blog...

...back in August 2013.  All of it still rings true today.

Subscribe to a "feed" for this blog

It's evidence of how little I know about blogs that I didn't realize there wasn't an option for subscribing to a "feed" for this blog.  Now there is here.  You can also get to it via the link, "Subscribe in a reader" in the left hand column, below all the ads and links.

According to "The National Jurist" magazine...

...I'm the 4th "most influential" person in American legal education.  Maybe, but who is the most influential in "philosophical education," that's what we all want to know.

What is it like to be a philosopher? Brian Leiter edition

MOVING TO FRONT FROM DEC. 22--FOR THOSE WHO MAY HAVE MISSED IT DURING THE HOLIDAY PERIOD AND MIGHT BE INTERESTED

Many thanks to Clifford Sosis for his patience and diligence in putting this together.  It was a lot of fun to be indulged in recounting all these memories.

Barring the unexpected, a hiatus until the weekend...

...dog days of summer, and all that.

After a two-year hiatus, brianleiter.net...

...is finally updated with everything you didn't want to know.

Sitemeter has gone crazy

A couple of readers have inquired about the Sitemeter stats, which now report this blog as having over 100,000 hits per day (compared to about 9,000 hits per day before it went mad, which is still above average for summer).  The recent Sitemeter reports are inaccurate, and we still can't figure out what happened.  For those interested, Statcounter appears to be giving accurate reports--click on "Public Stats" in the lower left column.

University of Chicago turned Bernie Sanders into a socialist

Bear that in mind the next time you hear talk of the right-wing "Chicago School."  Even David Bernstein (George Mason), right-wing defender of the Jews against everyone (including other Jews), has noted our political diversity (scroll down to the update of his latest rant).

Brian Leiter watch

Graphic designer!

The blog just had it's 30 millionth visit in the last few minutes...

...thanks for reading.  My reflections at the 10 million mark.

Reader poll #7 results: what is your primary occupation

So with not quite 1800 votes, here are the results: 

What is your primary occupation?

Tenure-track philosophy professor    21%379 Tenure-track professor in another field    6%101 Non-tenure-track philosophy teacher    9%168 Non-tenure-track teacher in another field    2%38 Academic administrator    1%22 Independent scholar    2%32 Student    36%648 Lawyer    4%69 Doctor    1%13 Engineer    1%13 Journalist    1%15 Finance industry    1%25 Computer industry    2%42 Unemployed, seeking work    2%32 None of the above    10%181

11% of readers are adjunct faculty, while 27% are tenure-stream.  I was struck by the large number of readers in other professions, such as law and computing.  I'd be curious to hear what some of the readers who chose "none of the above" do.  Comments are open.

Reader poll #6: What is your native language?

The choices were offered partly with an eye to what I know about the countries of readership.

QuestionPro

Reader poll #5: the results for political ideology/outlook

So with not quite 1400 votes, here are the results:

Which best describes your political ideology or outlook?

---

Marxian left
13%181
Social democratic left
40%560
American liberal
12%168
American moderate Democrat
7%91
American Republican
1%10
Burkean conservative
4%59
Social/religious conservative
3%43
Libertarian
7%100
Fascist/Authoritarian Right
3%39
None of the above
10%140

I'm interested to hear how some of the "none of the above" would describe their political ideology or outlook.  I note the results aren't that different from a similar poll about 4 1/2 years ago--slight decline in fascist readers, though!

Reader poll #3: your income

MOVING TO FRONT (POLL ORIGINALLY POSTED FEBRUARY 7) AND OPENING COMMENTS FOR DISCUSSION (AT REQUEST OF VARIOUS READERS)

 

Report only your income from all sources (stipends, teaching, royalties, investments, etc.); if you have no income of your own (e.g., because you are supported by parents or a spouse) then choose the first option.

QuestionPro

UPDATE: So with almost 1700 votes, here are the results:

No annual income:                8% (135)

Less than $20,000:              19% (326)

$20,001-$30,000:                14% (236)

$30,001-$40,000:                  7% (123)

$40,001-$50,000:                  5% (92)

$50,001-$75,000:                16% (270)

$75,001-$100,000:               12% (200)

$100,001-$150,000:               8% (138)

$150,000-$200,000:               3% (58)

$200,001-$300,000:               3% (50)

$301,000-$500,000:               1% (22)

Over $500,000:                      2% (38)

Put differently (and assuming, perhaps wrongly, that all income levels responded proportionately to the poll):  26% of readers earn between $20,000 and $50,000, and 16% of readers earn more than $100,000.

Reader poll #4: your religious identity

MOVING TO FRONT FROM FEBRUARY 10--RESULTS BELOW

Choose the category below that best fits your religion (or non-religious) beliefs/commitments:

(UPDATE:  I made an error below for the Muslim choices:  "Shia Muslin" should have been "Sunni Muslim."  If you identify as a Shiite Muslim, choose that one, and if you identify as a Sunni Muslim please chose "Shia"--sorry about that, but once the poll starts, I can't edit it without losing all the votes.)

 

QuestionPro

ANOTHER UNFORTUNATE OMISSION: the Eastern Orthodox Church.  Sorry about that.  I'd urge readers to choose Catholic, since I can not edit the poll at this point.

UPDATE:  So with almost 1900 votes, here's the reader breakdown:

70% of readers are either atheists or agnostics (52% atheist [978 readers], 18% agnostic [336 readers]).

Religions with at least 1% of the readership:

Catholic:            `   9% (165)

Other Protestant:    5% (97)

Episcopalian:           3% (64)

Jewish:                    3% (60, with roughly 1% each in Reform, Conservative, and Orthodox Judaism)

Calvinist:                  2% (39)

All of the following had 1% (with number of readers in parentheses):  Baptist (16), Lutheran (28), Mormon (16), Shiite Muslim (11), Buddhism (27), and Jainism (14).

 

Reader poll #2: gender

Readers, what is your gender?

QuestionPro

UPDATE: So with over 1500 votes cast since Friday, 89% of respondents were male, 11% were female.  About 16% of tenure-stream faculty are female (at least in the US), though my impression is a higher percentage of current graduate students are female.  It would be interesting to know the gender breakdown at other blogs.  (Far more than 11% of commenters here are female, interestingly.)

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

In January 2014, there were (according to Sitemeter) 306,464 visits to this blog and 438,846 page views.

In January 2015, there were (according to Sitemeter) 305,995 visits to this blog and 461,506 page views. 

(According to StatCounter, which I added in late 2014, there were, in January 2015, 335,902 visits and 458,827 page views--I've no idea what explains the small differences.)

Thanks for reading.

Thanks to University of Miami...

...both the Law School and Philosophy Department for having me out the last few days, I had a great time in both places, and not only because of the lovely weather!  I got excellent questions and feedback at both units on two different papers, and was grateful for the terrific hospitality on top of that.  I also had a chance to have a long talk with my co-editor, Brit Brogaard, about the future of the PGR, and we should have some announcements before too long about plans going forward.

https://chicago.academia.edu/BrianLeiter

Students and colleagues periodically pointed out that my academia.edu site was several years out of date; I finally got around to updating it with a current CV and a list of recent and upcoming talks, for anyone who is interested.

LA Review of Books reviews a new novel by Ian McEwan...

...and Why Tolerate Religion? together!

UVA bound...

...for what promises to be an interesting event.  So a bit less posting until the weekend.

Some papers posted on SSRN during the summer...

...in case they're of interest to anyone who took a vacation from blogs during the summer:

"The Case Against Free Speech"

"Marx, Law, Ideology, Legal Positivism"

"Reply to Five Critics of Why Tolerate Religion?

Tweet, tweet

I'm doing a bit more of it this summer.

"Why Tolerate Religion?" reviewed in Phil Review

Here.

Sorry for the dearth of posting...

...but I've been on the road (in California) first here and then here. 

Visiting the wonderful UCR Department, as I've been fortunate to do several times in recent years, prompts some reflections on our field and also on the interests in the Continental traditions that I share with many others.  There are, fortunately, lots of good places in the U.S. these days for students interested in Kant and post-Kantian European philosophy--Columbia, Georgetown, Notre Dame, Brown, BU and, in many ways, Chicago--but UCR is as good as any of them, and may be the best.  It's not just that they have a first-rate group of scholars working on Kant and post-Kantian European philosophy (Clark, Keller, Reath, Wrathall)--and an impressive group of grad students as well--but that everyone in the Department is interested in philosophy, meaning that those with primarily "Continental" interests are conversant with "analytic" philosophy and other parts of the history of philosophy, and vice versa.  

The term "pluralism" has, alas, been debased to the point that everyone now knows it is usually a code word for "crappy philosophy is welcome here."  But if it had not been devalued, then it would apply to UCR, though I think the more appropriate appellation is that UCR is an actual philosophy department, in which everyone is interested in philosophy, even if different figures or themes are more important for some than others.  When I left UT Austin some six years ago, part of the reason was that it had ceased to be a department of philosophy and had become something more like a "Department of Logic & Metaphysics," where that meant recent logic and metaphysics.  That's fine, UT Austin has become a leading Department of "Logic & Metaphysics" in the recent 'analytic' tradition.   I am (to the annoyance of my critics) a fan of the "analytic" tradition, but mostly I am a fan of philosophy, and most of the really important philosophy is not, by my lights, to be found in "recent logic and metaphysics". 

The field needs more places like UCR.  (The world needs more places with decent weather, but that's a separate issue!)

UPDATE:  One current PhD student at UT Austin not working in M&E/Language/Mind/Logic wrote to say he felt the department was more supportive of his work than my commentary would suggest.  I am happy to hear that, and I hope other students feel the same way.

Recent reviews of "Why Tolerate Religion?"

The good, the bad, and the ugly.  (This is a comment on the quality of the reviews, not the verdicts they reach!)   You would think a very clear, 185-page book would generate more consistently competent reviews, but the topic of religion, alas, seems to be an obstacle.

Philosophy Talk radio on Sunday

I'll be discussing Why Tolerate Religion? with John Perry and Ken Taylor.  10 am California time, noon in Chicago, 1 pm on the East Coast.

ADDENDUM:  I last did Philosophy Talk nearly a decade ago, that time, on Nietzsche.

Davidson College will find out that "The Truth is Terrible"

Later today!  (The paper is here.)

Progress in Philosophy Revisited

Two years ago I took part in panel in a conference on progress in philosophy.  (The contributions of me, Jennifer Nagel  and Dave Chalmers  are still online -- I had a tech fail in recording Pettit’s contribution).  My view was and is that philosophical progress is robust – the growth is Fibonacci (think of a tree branching).  Just speaking from what I’ve seen in areas of philosophy that I am familiar with, the grown and development has been astounding over the last thirty years.

Fibonacci growth is impressive, but is it enough?  The second part of my talk was that it is not nearly enough.

Many people are familiar with Kurzweil’s thesis about the exponential growth in technology leading to a kind of technological singularity.   Singularity happens when you hit the elbow in the exponential curve and the curve effectively shoot straight up (or appears to).  If that is right, then the technological curve is pulling away from the philosophy curve very rapidly and is about to leave it completely behind.  What that means is that our technology is going to leave our critical thinking skills behind.  You may think that is already happening, and I agree: I’m just saying the problem is about to get much worse.

It doesn’t have to get worse.  The only reason that technology grows exponentially is that we keep feeding it resources.  The only reason philosophy doesn’t is that we starve it for resources (we don’t have enough bodies to throw at philosophical problems).  I say we need to seriously think about redistributing resources away from technological development and into philosophy, and allow philosophy departments to grow new programs that focus on new technologies and their development.  Why would anyone do this?  Well, someone needs to make vivid what can go wrong if we don’t.  One idea is that if we don’t understand technology we become alienated from it – a view that I floated yesterday. 

So here are some questions for discussion.  Is philosophy making the kind of progress I believe it is?  Is technology pulling away from us as Kurzweil believes it is?  Is this a problem?  Can we fix it?  If so, how?

"Nietzsche Brian Leiter"

A journal recently sent me an automated request to referee a manuscript, which, unfortunately, I could not do within the parameters offered.  From the salutation, I learned how the editors keep track of me:

    "Dear Nietzsche Brian Leiter,"

Who reads this blog?

So with not quite 2800 responses, here's the breakdown:

Philosophy faculty member   32%900 Philosophy graduate student   30%848 Philosophy undergraduate student   6%181 Faculty member in another field   7%200 Graduate student in another field   6%163 Undergraduate student in another field   1%38 School teacher (high school, middle school, elementary)   1%29 High school student   0%9 Journalist   0%10 Lawyer   3%83 Doctor   1%14 Other professional outside academia   6%157 Other   6%161

Of course, I don't know if particular groups responded at differential rates.  But on the assumption this is a representative sample, 68% of respondents are in philosophy, as faculty or students; 39% of readers are academic faculty in one field or another (40% are teachers of some kind); and the non-academic readership is somewhere around 10-15%.  I appreciate all the comments from readers, especially those who chose 'other,' and I find it very gratifying that these readers find a way to stay connected with philosophy via this site.