19 Matching Annotations
  1. Nov 2018
  2. Jul 2018
    1. Institutionalised demands for academic hyper-performativity can also be part of formal academic workload models.

      Very true. The pressure to produce quality 'outputs' quickly is real in many places. Time with family and for self-care would be first sacrificed.

  3. Nov 2017
  4. Aug 2017
    1. Not all things wise and good are philosophy Nicholas Tampio
    2. Good point. I think the author’s argument is weak in overlooking the issue that there are in fact philosophical traditions that do make arguments for God, for the immortal soul, etc.Additionally even the Greek tradition had philosophy as a spiritual discipline in the sense that it was about the individual’s initiation into a one-ness with the rest of creation. Thus the Indian, the Buddhist, the Native American can in fact have a philosophical tradition far more in line with the Greeks than the sad attempts of the Dennets and Churchlands who want to resurrect a debunked behaviorism or invest in silliness like computer programs as conscious entities.
    3. In fact, an argument could be made - one that respects the Greek philosophic tradition - that contemporary Anglo-American “philosophy”, based in physicalist ontology, is not in fact philosophy (love of wisdom) at all, but rather, represents the death of philosophy much as fundamentalism represents the death of the spirit of religion.
    1. epistemic commitments A poster below distinguished "philosophy itself" from "the history of philosophy." I don't agree with this distinction: to me, philosophy and the history of philosophy are the same field. However, let's look at both categories as possible approaches for eastern philosophy: This distinction leaves two options for eastern thought: (1) place eastern thought alongside Plato and Aristotle in the "history of philosophy" box as a piece of trivia or (2) pick and choose the parts of Eastern philosophy you like, convert it into "ideas" by extracting it from the text, break the text into a series of distinctions and discrete positions, and then attach the "ideas" to various "-isms." Basically, analytic philosophy would do to Eastern philosophy what Rorty and Dreyfus do to Heidegger. I don't mean to give an anti-analytic polemic here (and I mean this with the deepest respect for the posters below, who are simply giving their honest impressions of the climate of their field), but the debates below make it really clear why analytic philosophy can't accommodate Eastern thought (anymore than they can accommodate Foucault and Derrida). The analytic project is only interested in whatever it can "use" from Eastern philosophy; it's not interested in what Eastern thought has to say for itself.
    1. The Comparison to Continental Coverage I agree completely that there are many Continental figures who are understudied in US philosophy departments. However, consider the following figures. The PRG ranks 13 schools that have expertise in "20th Century Continental philosophy." An additional 11 schools are unranked but "recommended for consideration by the Advisory Board," for a total of 24. (http://www.philosophicalgourmet.com/breakdown/breakdown29.asp) In the area of "19th Century Continental Philosophy," the PRG ranks 20 programs, and lists an additional 4 programs as "recommended," for a total of 24. (http://www.philosophicalgourmet.com/breakdown/breakdown27.asp) Now let's turn to Chinese philosophy: the programs are not ranked but simply grouped, "due to the small number of evaluators." Eight programs are "grouped," and an additional 5 are "recommended," for a total of 13. (http://www.philosophicalgourmet.com/breakdown/breakdown33.asp) If the numerical disparity between the coverage of Continental and Chinese philosophy is not immediately obvious, consider these additional facts. Chinese philosophy is a tradition that is over two millennia long, and is as diverse as all of the Western tradition. So the PRG lists 24 doctoral programs as at least recommended in 19th century Continental philosophy, 24 at least recommended in 20th century Continental philosophy, and 13 at least recommended in all two thousand five hundred years of Chinese philosophy. Hmm. When we consider Indian philosophy...oh, there is no ranking for that at all. So, yes, Continental philosophy is understudied in the US. But it is worse in Chinese and Indian philosophy. The Quality Argument In an interview done by Skye Cleary and forthcoming in the APA Blog I make the following point. If someone tells me that Chinese philosophy (for example) is "not really philosophy" or is not sufficiently argumentative or "rational," I like to ask him: why he thinks that the Mohist state-of-nature argument to justify government authority is not philosophy? What does he make of Mengzi’s reductio ad absurdum against the claim that human nature is reducible to desires for food and sex? Why does he dismiss Zhuangzi’s version of the problem of the criterion? What is his opinion of Han Feizi’s argument that political institutions must be designed so that they do not depend upon the virtue of political agents? What does he think of Zongmi’s argument that reality must fundamentally be mental, because it is inexplicable how consciousness could arise from matter that was nonconscious? Why does he regard the Platonic dialogues as philosophical, yet dismiss Fazang’s dialogue in which he argues for and responds to objections against the claim that individuals are defined by their relationships to others? What is his opinion of Wang Yangming’s arguments for the claim that it is impossible to know what is good yet fail to do what is good? What does he make of Mou Zongsan’s critique of Kant, or Liu Shaoqi’s argument that Marxism is incoherent unless supplemented with a theory of individual ethical transformation? Of course, the answer to each question is that those who suggest that Chinese philosophies are irrational have never heard of any of these arguments because they do not bother to actually read them. Or, if they do bother to glance at them, they hold them to a higher standard of explicitness and clarity than they do Aristotle or Kant. (We are so used to reading Aristotle and Kant that we forget how unclear and unmotivated their claims will seem to someone who has not studied them in context, or with the guide of secondary sources and teachers.) Other arguments on this topic can be found in the excellent essays by *Eric Schwitzgebel, "Why Don't We Know Our Chinese Philosophy?" http://www.faculty.ucr.edu/~eschwitz/SchwitzAbs/NotKnowChinese.htm *Justin Tiwald, "A Case for Chinese Philosophy," http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.apaonline.org/resource/collection/2EAF6689-4B0D-4CCB-9DC6-FB926D8FF530/v08n1Asian.pdf The Diversity Card If anyone has any doubts about the role of implicit racism in maintaining the status quo in philosophy, I would invite her to read Eugene Park's essay, "Why I Left Academia: Philosophy’s Homogeneity Needs Rethinking" (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hippo-reads/why-i-left-academia_b_5735320.html). Park was a doctoral student in a top-ranked philosophy department who was passionate about Western philosophy but also interested in exploring insights from non-Western philosophy. He was told that he should transfer to a program in "ethnic studies," where this approach would be more welcome. In the face of ethnocentrism like this, Park eventually dropped out. As Myisha Cherry and Eric Schwitgebel point out, philosophy has a diversity problem that is actually worse than that in other fields in the humanities, and it shows no signs of getting better. We must address issues of diversity if we wish for our field to survive in the future. (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-0306-schwitzgebel-cherry-philosophy-so-white-20160306-story.html) I agree that linking the call to study non-Western philosophy to issues of diversity will politicize it in ways that may lead to outcomes I would not prefer in an ideal world. Sadly, we are not in an ideal world. I and many others have been fighting with rational arguments for decades to try to get greater acceptance of non-Western philosophy into the curriculum. The rate of change has been glacial. Consequently, I increasingly think that the only way to effect change in philosophy is by appealing to students to mobilize and demand changes. For Moderate Change If philosophers want moderate, rational change, they can take simple steps. For one thing, the next time you have an opening, consider whether you need yet another person studying the philosophical traditions that grow out of Plato and Aristotle (both of whom I deeply, almost reverentially, admire). Wouldn't the field, and your students, be better served by someone teaching Indian, Chinese, or some other non-mainstream form of philosophy?
  5. Mar 2017
    1. She starts off with the simplicity of her life – love, family, and work. Special thanks to her mother for giving her the belief that everything she does is art and accepted. But above all “That cruelty might be human, and it might be very cultural, it is not acceptable.”

    1. Meryl Streep Wins Supporting Actress: 1980 Oscars

      The material contained in this video are the contents of Meryl Streep's first Academy Award for Kramer vs Kramer in 1980.

      During her speech she gives praise and thanks to the director, crew members such as costume, lighting etc.

      She also goes on to thank her co-star Dustin Hoffman whom also wins for Best Actor this year.

      Meryl does not express any of her political concerns during this moment. A moment that will not compare to her future wins because nothing compares to your first.

  6. Feb 2017
    1. Get a tour bus full of unsuspecting movie fans and tell them they’re going to get to see a special exhibit about the Oscars. Then: Surprise! After winding their way through a backstage labyrinth, they’re at the Oscars. For real!

      This is so awesome!

  7. Jul 2016
  8. Jun 2016
  9. Jul 2015
    1. The result? Students’ sense of vulnerability is skyrocketing.

      I had similar thoughts around the immensely popular video about street harassment made by hollaback! after a former partner compared an unwelcome invitation I had extended to see a concert together to street harassment. It got me wondering what disciplines have good dialectic for separating useful from harmful exposure. So far I have only an inkling that trauma therapy offers some hope, and it connects the conversation to concepts like triggers.

  10. Jan 2014
    1. Aaron Swartz's act of hacktivism was an act of resistance to a corrupt system that has subverted distribution of the most important product of the academy—knowledge.