New APPS: Art, Politics, Philosophy, Science

Musings on the place of Christian philosophy

These musings have been prompted by an intriguing discussion on feminist philosophers on what to do when you are handed a religious tract. Participants in this discussion asked, amongst other things, if it is the case that religious believers face prejudice from the overwhelmingly secular philosophical community [Note: I'm restricting my discussion to Christian religious beliefs because I'm not sufficiently familiar with attitudes on other religious beliefs in philosophy].  

The PhilPaper survey indicates that the majority of philosophers are either atheists (72.8%) or agnostic/undecided (12.5%). It is a particularly interesting result, because on most other philosophical topics there is less agreement (the exceptions are that philosophers seem to be overwhelmingly non-skeptical realists and scientific realists). There is also discussion on whether philosophy of religion, especially from a theistic perspective would be worthy of academic attention.  However, at the same time, Plantinga remarked in a recent interview with the New York times "There are vastly more Christian philosophers and vastly more visible or assertive Christian philosophy now than when I left graduate school". In the most recent issue of Faith & Philosophy he even cautions young Christian philosophers that "a danger we now face, perhaps, is triumphalism...it is now possible for Christian philosophers to work together and publish on topics that would have been beyond the pale forty years ago; there are an increasing number of Christian philosophers at American universities" (p. 268). 

A holiday gift idea: the Iris Marion Young Diversity Scholars Fund

Please consider donating to the Iris Marion Young Diversity Scholars Fund. The Fund, which honors the memory of a great scholar, supports students at the Philosophy in an Inclusive Key Summer Institute (PIKSI) sponsored by the Rock Ethics Institute at Penn State.

This seven-day institute is designed to encourage undergraduate students from under-represented groups to consider future study in the field of philosophy. PIKSI will emphasize the on-going project of greater inclusiveness that is transforming the discipline, inviting students to be participants in the conversation.... 

If you know promising undergraduate women or men from underrepresented groups such as African Americans, Chicano/as and Latino/as, Native Americans, Asian Americans, LGBT persons, economically disadvantaged communities, and people with disabilities, please call this program to their attention. In addition, please consider serving as their “sponsor.” Faculty sponsors mentor students, helping them to prepare their applications, and, when possible and appropriate, work with the students after the Summer Institute to help further the gains the students have made.

Philosophic Taboos

Philosophy is often viewed as akin to a normal science (I quote Mohan,, philosophers understand themselves as investigating "reality, using transparently objective methods (even in the realm of values). In this sense, they regard philosophy as continuous with science..."[or: "philosophy as extension of science or PES.") One consequence is that PES is accompanied with some of the vices that are characteristic of normal science in its contemporary institutional settings (e.g., mythic histories that promote a picture of progress (Cf. Soames), excessive boundary policing, etc--read your Kuhn or Feyerabend). In particular, folk that do normal science need not answer all objections to ruling theories. This attitude is often accompanied by a lazy, dismissive attitude toward those working on different puzzles (or who reject philosophy as puzzle solving altogether [see Brian Leiter's comments here]). One important sign or proxy that one is dealing with such attitudes is the presence of taboos that allow a community to focus on problems it deems worthy of interest and systematically ignore alternative approaches.

A brief look at 2011 PGR 20th-Century Continental Philosophy evaluators

Mohan and Mark have made several interesting posts on the results of the 2011 PGR. Here I’d like to consider the makeup of the 20^th century Continental Philosophy evaluators. Quoted self-descriptions come from their linked webpages. Bracketed comments are mine. Overall comments are below the fold, after the self-descriptions.

Evaluators: James Bohman, Steven Crowell, Maudemarie Clark, David Dudrick, Gordon Finlayson, Max de Gaynesford, Charles Guignon, Gary Gutting, Beatrice Han-Pile, Scott Jenkins, Pierre Keller, Michelle Kosch, Brian Leiter, Dean Moyar, Stephen Mulhall, Brian O’Connor, Peter Poellner, Bernard Reginster, Michael Rosen, Joseph Schear, Iain Thomson, Georgia Warnke, Mark Wrathall, Julian Young.

Friday political music selection - technology and work

See, it is back.  And on Friday.  And political.  And selected.  
I suppose any survey of political music about technology must begin with the classic, here performed by Billy Bragg who tried hard to rescue this piece from nationalist nonsense.
Which transitions nicely to this piece by Sting, what with the reference back to Blake.

On a different theme there is this classic by Gil.  With another on a similar theme by the DBTs.

And while I'm on the DBTs, no post about technology killing humanity could possibly end without John Henry.  Here's a brilliant re-envisioning of that story that makes explicit the political subtext. The original hard-rocking version is fabulous, but I can't find a good version on the web.  Same album as "people on the moon" which I heartily endorse. 

So have at it folks.

Brazilian music on Fridays: Jorge Ben(Jor)

I'm having a busy week, and on Friday I'm attending the Amsterdam Philosophy Graduate Conference, so no time for extensive blogging. So I figured I could post two songs by Jorge Ben(Jor), who, as I mentioned before, is probably my favorite Brazilian singer/composer of all times. Lately, I've been playing his stuff a lot in the car while driving with my kids, and it thrills me to see them enjoying his music (in fact, asking for it), picking up the lyrics and singing along. Early exposure to his music is probably one of the most important elements in a child's education, if you ask me.

The two songs here are both classics, and both from his debut album, Samba Esquema Novo -- how can a debut album be such a classic? One is the über-classic 'Mas que nada', known in numerous versions by numerous singers, but this is the one and only original version (somehow, youtube does not let me embed it, so just follow the link). The other is 'Por cause de você, menina', less known internationally but just as good. Now you know what to listen to with your kids (or without kids!) this weekend.

Mohan has gotten me obsessed with this

Sitting around wasting time adding up numbers.  Here's a ranking that comes from adding all the means of the area scores for the top 20 overall departments.  

1. NYU 109

2.Michigan 104

3. Harvard 92

4. Princeton 90

5. stanford 87

6. Pitt 86

7. Notre Dame 82

8. Columbia 80.5

9. Yale 71

10 Rutgers 70.5

11Berkeley 70

12 MIT 67.5

13 UNC 66

14 USC 59

15 CUNY 58.5

16 Brown 57

17 Arizona 55.5

18 UCLA 53.5

19 Cornell 50

20 Chicago 45

So, first, I have no idea what to make of any of this. Just playing around.

Second, I do think that there is some serious over-counting of areas in this method of amalgamating.  15 total points in math, as many as ethics. Shortly - because I'm obsessed - I will do this again collapsing a few of the specialty areas that strike me as not adding really new strengths.  

Third, I have probably made some calculation errors. Feel free to check if you are out to waste time like me.

Fourth, schools start getting very close to one another once you are out of the top 8.  (Note the big drop from 8-9.)  I couldn't resist calculating georgetown, and though ranked overall 36th, we come in at 40.5.  

Fifth - of course all this relies on the rankings provided by the PGR reviewers.  It is just another way of amalgamating those rankings.  But I think the fact that there are such differences even within these rankings is interesting.  

Time to take a walk on the real side; admit the bastards beat us?

Thanks to our "liberal Democrat" president, revocation of the Magna Carta is now permanent.  Would it be too much to ask that people wake the hell up and take this seriously?
Details here

Sadly, I think the answer to that question is "yes".  And so I'm allowing myself a day of wallowing - exemplified by my title, which refers to this bit of brilliant despair - I'll no doubt come around to something more positive in a bit.  

(I also know that "Political Music Friday" has begun to function like "Holy Roman Empire" but it is not dead, just resting.)

Explaining the gender gap in mathematics, chess and philosophy

What do mathematics, chess and philosophy have in common? Among many other things, they have a glaring gap between men and women.  And the reason in all three cases may be cultural, rather than biological. 

Job interviews through video-conference

It’s job season again (‘tis the season to be jolly!’), and one of the things that come up more and more often in discussions on job searches is the possibility of conducting job interviews through video-conference. Many point out that it has several advantages, both for interviewer and for interviewee (lower costs, minimizing stressful and taxing trips etc.), but obviously there are some downsides as well (in particular, the ever-looming possibility of total technical breakdown!).

So I figured it might be useful to open a thread where people can report on their past experiences with video-conference job interviews, from both perspectives (interviewer and interviewee), so as to help those preparing for such interviews in the near future: what to expect, which mistakes to avoid, the best technologies/apps to use, tips on how to feel comfortable in the situation, how to minimize the interference of irrelevant factors etc. (Full disclosure: I’ll be conducting video-conference job interviews in January, and that’s what got me thinking.)

I hope this can become a useful source of ‘dos and don’ts’ for everybody.

PGR: Sorting it Out by Subfields (Revised)

There is a wealth of detail in the newly released Philosophical Gourmet Report. Mindful of the fact that some departments rank high overall, but low in relatively many subfields (and vice versa), I thought to check how departments do overall if you aggregate excellence in subfields. (A proviso: subfields are not equal in size, importance to the discipline, or prestige.)

Here is a look at the top twenty US departments, plus the top in each non-US region (UK, Canada, Australasia). I looked only at the top three groupings of departments in each specialty, and Unranked (ratings of less than 3.0).

Women in epistemology

Certain Doubts has a post up, with the link to a list of women working in epistemology drafted by Trent Dougherty. He also asks for suggestions of additions to the list, and notices that similar initiatives for other subfields of philosophy would be much welcome. I maintain such a list of women working in philosophy of logic and philosophical logic (though at times it takes me a while to update it!), and I second Trent's suggestion that this be done for other subfields. As he puts it, 

I suspect that one of the most common sources of women being under-represented [...] at conferences and in edited volumes [...] is the “comes to mind” bias.  One way to counteract this is to “double check.”

PGR: Sorting it Out by Subfields

UPDATE: In accordance with the comments received, I revised the table to include Group 3, and (because some errors crept into my spreadsheet) I then reposted. I used Dhananjay's figures in his comment below, including his corrigenda, but including the updated figure for American Pragmatism, in which Toronto got a Group 1. I also gave 1 point, instead of 2 for Group 3. (That's a judgement call, of course, but the number of Group 3 departments in most fields is substantially more than Group 2s.)

CFP: Seeing Things Differently: Art, Philosophy, and the Futures of Feminism

Website here. Some details: 

Friday 30^th and Saturday 31^st March 2012 / University of Dundee & Dundee Contemporary Arts

Keynote Speakers:

• Dr Christine Battersby (Reader Emerita in Philosophy, University of Warwick)
• Professor Tina Chanter (Professor of Philosophy, DePaul University, Chicago)
• Professor Kerstin Mey (Director of Research and Enterprise, University for the Creative Arts) 

The visual arts have a well-established history of engagement with feminism and gender issues. While artists have confronted such issues directly in their work, feminist theorists and philosophers have interrogated the gendering of vision as well as core aesthetic categories such as genius and the art/craft distinction. The ‘feminist’ label, however, can sometimes seem more of a trap than a call for liberatory practices.

This event takes as a starting point the idea that neither all artworks nor all theories informed by a gendered or feminist perspective will necessarily be focussed on what we might think of as ‘questions of gender’ or ‘women’s issues’. Where feminism succeeds is in making it harder to see women as simply determined by their sex or to reduce their work to a question of their gender. Many philosophers and practising artists who see their work as centrally informed by feminist or gendered concerns have moved beyond critique of masculinist traditions and paradigms to re-imagine bodies, identities, matter, space, time, ethics, power and freedom in radically new ways. 

16 tons

We're adding a new category: "Debts: student, national and otherwise." We've discussed many aspects of debt here at New APPS, theoretical and practical; it's time for it to have its own category as we struggle against a "generation of debt."[UPDATE: as if on cue, here's Rortybomb on "Reinventing debtor's prisons for the 21st Century." H/T Aaron Bady, who writes here of the one-day Dec 12 Oakland port shutdown.]

Fostering racial diversity in the philosophy curriculum: Islamic and Arabic philosophy

In the context of our recent discussions on how to make the philosophy profession more diverse along the race dimension, I’d like to put forward a modest suggestion for everybody’s consideration. It has in fact been put forward by a commentator in a NewAPPS thread quite a few months ago (unfortunately, I don’t remember the name of the commentator in question), and remained in the back of my mind since. Now that we are explicitly discussing these issues, it seems like an appropriate moment to bring it to the fore.

On Black Underrepresentation and Progress in the Profession

[We at NewAPPS are very grateful to Prof. McPherson, who generously accepted our invitation to guest-blog.--ES]

With regard to Black Americans, I feel about "implicit bias" much the same as I feel about the "pipeline problem.” There is a willful, not necessarily a conscious, preference among many members of the philosophy profession largely to maintain the status quo in terms of: the social group profiles of members; the dynamics of prestige and influence; and the areas and questions deemed properly or deeply "philosophical." None of this is good for black folks.

Despite its strivings toward disembodied, ahistorical truth, objectivity, and (now) science, philosophy is obviously an enculturated practice. This is not a radical or viciously relativist claim that should discredit philosophy. Rather, this is a modest observation meant to highlight reality, which there is an ongoing tradition of ignoring or denying.

Erase the Stain! Three Proposals About Race and Gender

In a recent post, I commented rather casually, and with mainly satirical intent, that a certain conference had invited neither any women nor any non-whites. This led to a very interesting comment thread that raises a very important question:

• What is a non-white?

More generally, and more precisely:

• When should membership in a group make someone the target of affirmative choice?

I want to make some suggestions.

When American bigots attack cartoons

Naif Al-Mutawa: The continuing saga of The99, superheroes inspired by Islam from TED Blog on Vimeo.

The Secrets of Male Privacy

The Episteme conferences have a decent track record of female participation: a conference in Toronto in 2006 had a substantial majority of women, if I remember correctly. But the next one strikes out completely. Which is disappointing because "The Epistemological Problems of Privacy and Secrecy" is an imaginative new topic to explore, but not one on which there is a pre-existing pool of expertise. And you might think that women might be particularly affected by certain aspects of Privacy and Secrecy. (But what would I know?) And one might add: non-whites too for all one knows. Think of the Epistemological Problems of Extraordinary Rendition.

The Philosophical Gourmet Report 2011: A Foodie Takes a Bite

The 2011 Leiter rankings appeared on Tuesday. They reflect how a certain broad community of philosophers think about the discipline, and about where it is going. As such, it is instructive, absorbing, and fun to root around its wealth of detail.

First, a (necessarily) broad-brush observation about the discipline itself.  There is much talk, on this blog and everywhere else, about the deeply felt top-level divide that expresses itself, for example, in the emergence of SPEP. How to capture it?

One superficial marker—the SPEP side is somewhat more pluralistic linguistically. It recognizes French and German, while the “Other” is English-only. (Even at leading European centres of Otherness, English is the default language of publication and even of oral communication.) SPEP is thus called “continental,” a term that I personally find unhelpful, though I will not try to substitute another.

Brazilian music on Fridays: Os Novos Baianos

I had a request to post on Os Novos Baianos; they were the uber-hippies of Brazilian music, even by 1970s standards. They recorded quite a few records in the 1970s, but the most famous of them is their 1972 record, Acabou Chorare, which was ranked the number 1 Brazilian album of all times by the Rolling Stone ranking. Many of the members of the band later went on to have successful solo careers: Pepeu Gomes, Baby Consuelo and Moraes Moreira. As I'm a bit short in time today, I'll be brief with the text and go straight to two of the great songs from Acabou Chorare.

The canary in the coal mine

An appeal from Sudhir Trivedi, President of the Faculty Senate of Southern University in Baton Rouge (SUBR). Where he says "Louisiana," I think you can safely substitute your state. The question is one of "when" not "if." While the mechanisms may differ I think you'll recognize the motivations of the admins. 

Amidst all the things that are inappropriate, illegal, and absurd about the declaration of financial exigency at SUBR, one stands out. We (SUBR) are about to become a model for you (the rest of Louisiana) as to how to gut the faculty, while supporting extraneous administration, in order to balance the budget. Within three hours after FE was declared at SUBR, regents chair Bob Levy and regents high commissioner Jim Purcell called Southern system president Ronald Mason and the Board and congratulated them for taking this extraordinary step to gut the faculty (see attached). This was reiterated by these two gentlemen on November 9, 2011 at LSU. See the link --- http://theadvocate.com/home/1284994-125/purcell-defends-su-action.html

What is happening at Southern is much bigger than Southern and is about to become a model for all of you. It is clear that our board was told by the regents to declare financial exigency, thus, the vote of 14-0.  Our only recourse is to mount a legal challenge and get an injunction to stop the implementation of financial exigency. Please help us fight this fight. Send this email to all faculty members on your respective campuses.

I am writing to ask that you make a contribution of $100 or whatever you can afford to the “Faculty Defense Committee”. Our intent is to raise at least $10,000, which is necessary to mount a legal and successful challenge against the recent decision of the administration and the board of supervisors to declare financial exigency. You can deposit the money at Southern Teachers and Parents Federal Credit Union (at Southern University Campus) OR at Campus Federal Credit Union (LSU Campus). The name of the account is “Faculty Defense Committee”. Or, you can mail a check, payable to the “Faculty Defense Committee”, to: Faculty Defense Committee, c/o Sudhir Kumar Trivedi, 2800 Dalrymple Drive, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70808.

We Are Not Contingent: An Adjunct Manifesto

This is a compelling statement by our colleagues forced into precarious labor conditions. Any discussion of the political economy of higher education simply must include the situation of these colleagues, and those of us in tenured or tenure-track positions must do all we can to demonstrate our solidarity with them.

In particular, we must analyze the relation of graduate student labor to adjunct labor, and insist that ABDs and recent PhDs are not "preparing to enter the job market," for they are already in the "job system." That is, they are already essential components of the labor force whose role in the political economy of higher education can only be seen in terms of a single, multi-dimensional system. 

Read the whole thing; here's the preamble:

We are the non-tenure track faculty who now constitute two-thirds of the instructional workforce at universities and colleges across the nation. We are frequently invisible to administrators, yet we are the first professors and instructors that undergraduate students meet on their journey to becoming engaged learners. We are the majority. We have been silent too long, and it is time for us to reclaim our voices and outline our demands.  

Philosophy in an Inclusive Key Summer Institute

In comments on the preceding post, Tim O'Keefe calls the Rock Ethics Institute (Penn State) Philosophy in an Inclusive Key summer program (for undergraduates) to our attention. A key passage: 

If you know promising undergraduate women or men from underrepresented groups such as African Americans, Chicano/as and Latino/as, Native Americans, Asian Americans, LGBT persons, economically disadvantaged communities, and people with disabilities, please call this program to their attention. In addition, please consider serving as their “sponsor.” Faculty sponsors mentor students, helping them to prepare their applications, and, when possible and appropriate, work with the students after the Summer Institute to help further the gains the students have made.

Transportation to and from the institute, room and board, and a small stipend will be provided for participants. While we expect that most students will come from four-year colleges, promising students from two-year institutions are also welcome.

Why a Gendered Conference Campaign and not a Race/Disability Conference Campaign?

Those who endorse and practice the Gendered Conference Campaign are often asked: why focus on gender instead of other under-represented groups, such as people of color, disabled or GLBTQ philosophers? This question comes up so often that I thought it might be worth trying to formulate an answer to it.

First of all, let me submit that we should worry about under-represented groups in philosophy specifically and predominantly with respect to groups that have been historically oppressed. A friend half-jokingly asked me why I do not worry about the under-representation of skate-boarders at philosophy conferences; without having to resort to essentialism, I suppose we can all agree that there is an important difference in historical background here. That women, members of certain ethnic groups, disabled people, GLBTQ people, and specific other groups have a long and complex history of systematic oppression and social injustice, in particular with respect to education and academia, is (I suppose) beyond doubt. So no, it is not any random, gerrymandered under-represented group that deserves the same focus; there are long histories of inequalities for specific groups that we are trying to catch up with.

Philosophy of male biology in the UK

The announcement for the conference “Philosophy of Biology in the UK” has been circulated on Philos-L (as far as I can see, no website for the event yet). Sadly, it is yet again a conference with an all-male lineup of keynote speakers (five, to be exact). Since reading the announcement, I’ve been trying to think of UK-based female philosophers of biology, but (except for the two women involved in the organization of the event) could only come up with names of people working elsewhere (admittedly, not really my field, so there may well be obvious people I am failing to remember; plus, I was interpreting 'philosophy of biology' in a fairly narrow way). There is a good number of female philosophers of biology doing interesting work, but admittedly I was mostly thinking of people based in the US. (Notice however that one of the keynote speakers is listed with an Australian affiliation, so presumably the UK restriction is not that strict.)

So perhaps women are even more under-represented in philosophy of biology than in other sub-fields of philosophy, in the UK in particular. (I find it particularly puzzling in light of the fact that biology is actually an area with a much better gender balance than philosophy itself.) Does this make a conference with the title “Philosophy of Biology in the UK” and an all-male lineup of speakers more acceptable? I submit that it does not, in fact much to the contrary. Such a lineup not only reflects but in fact also reinforces the sociological phenomenon in question (if indeed it is a real phenomenon); it is precisely in situations like this that ensuring a non-all-male lineup arguably becomes even more important.

New APPS Interview: Cressida Heyes

Today’s New APPS interview is with Cressida Heyes, Canada Research Chair in Philosophy of Gender and Sexuality at the University of Alberta.

Thanks for doing this interview with us, Cressida. Let’s start with your personal practice of philosophy. What are the pleasures and pains of philosophy for you? 

I’m an introvert by nature, so although I enjoy others’ company often enough, I also need to spend periods of time each day alone, thinking my own thoughts, recharging. Doing philosophy seriously for a long time means that one’s mental landscape only gets more and more complex and interesting, so I suspect there’s a self-reinforcing dynamic here. I like working things out in my head. 

Professional Ethics question....

So a while ago I refereed a paper on a terrific, but somewhat obscure topic--one that I wish I had dreamed up. Sadly the paper was badly executed, and I could not recommend publication. (I did offer lots of suggestions on how to get a journal article out of it.) So...question: how long must I wait until I start working on this topic? May I ever? Can one ever draw on research one has refereed and rejected? And how does one do so fairly without exposing one's identity?

Theory & Event issue on OWS

It will be open access for three months.* Edited by Jodi Dean, James Martel, and Davide Panagia. Articles by Franco Berardi, Wendy Brown, John Buell, William Connolly, Jodi Dean, Richard Grusin, McKenzie Wark, Slavoj Zizek, and myself.

* There's a lot to say just about that sentence, involving the commodification of academic labor and open-source publishing, but that's for another time.