Feministphilosophers.wordpress.com has a thread on the Pluralist Guide to Philosophy. Leiter continues to insult places like SIUC and calling all these schools, SPEP schools. We do shoddy work? Really? Come down and see what at least I do. I'll take you out for coffee.
I don't think ad hominems are good practice in philosophizing.
4 comments:
There's also a discussion at the New APPS blog, ostensibly concerning the "climate for women" issue. Note that in both cases the mods have been deleting the posts that reference Professor Leiter.
Notice how no one is really touching the inflammatory comments he made concerning the quality of SPEP-based programs. I think the New APPS blog should call him out on that.
As I said, and I reiterate: When the axe of funding comes down on the head of a philosophy department, you could be doing moral psychology, logical meta-theory or work on Heidegger. It doesn't matter. We shouldn't be so divided. However, I think Leiter has invested a lot of time, pride and effort into the PGR. I can't complain about the quality of work done at my school and I was in an analytic MA prior to coming here. There is enough rigor to go around.
Agreed. Mark Lance's new post on NA about "queering" the chasm is pretty good. Like you, I work on non-analytic stuff but one of my degrees is analytic. As a result I incorporate a lot of analyticky insights, style, etc. in my writing. I like the idea of being a tertium quid, "queer," whatever. :)
Love your blog, by the way. Been reading it for a looong time.
Well thank you for that. I write this stuff and wonder if anybody really reads it. Sometimes, as an academic philosopher, I often wonder if it does any good. Then, I ask myself if I should've went to law school.
Obviously, I've grown a little bit since my MA days. I'll link the Lance thread since I find it quite good. Dissolving the distinction for the "right reasons" but not parading around as if there never was a distinction is a little dishonest.
Post a Comment