Philosophy Meta-Forum http://www.philosophymetaforum.org She's a whiny heeb, whining as heebs whine. Yawn. Rudjer 2018-01-17 07:04:52 I don't think anyone here has claimed potential is always realized. So I think we should keep track of it, but in both kinds of cases. <p> <p><blockquote> <p> <p>OP here, I was just waiting for one of the prestige monsters to come out and make us remember that meritocracy was always a sham, it's only where you got your phd that matters. It means you're clever. A good job talk also signals you're clever. You make fun of publishing in Acta Analytica or Erkenntnis or Ratio, yet one of your wunderkind could only publish in a law review 8 YEARS after getting a phd in an instutitution with tonnes of connections, bright colleagues to critique and make your papers better and 2/2 teaching. I know people who work in a 4/4 with better publications 2 years out. <p> <p>Maybe that tells us cleverness, or potential is just biased garbage. <p> <p>People love talking about structural injustice, but god forbid we go after the structural injustice in our own profession, then the wagons circle. <p> <p>I say we try to keep a long memory for once, let us do a longitudinal survey of all the people hired on "potential" aka with zero publications and see where they end up in 7 years <p> <p><footer>Carla</footer> <p></blockquote> Wilhelm 2018-01-17 06:46:41 She takes his sloppy ass to task. <p> <p><blockquote> <p> <p>Ah yes Nussbaum, the neurotic Jew of neurotic Jews. Surely an insightful and balanced critiqued awaits. <p> <p><footer>Rudjer <p></footer> <p></blockquote> Wilhelm 2018-01-17 06:44:38 Ah yes Nussbaum, the neurotic Jew of neurotic Jews. Surely an insightful and balanced critiqued awaits. Rudjer 2018-01-17 06:34:48 OP here, I was just waiting for one of the prestige monsters to come out and make us remember that meritocracy was always a sham, it's only where you got your phd that matters. It means you're clever. A good job talk also signals you're clever. You make fun of publishing in Acta Analytica or Erkenntnis or Ratio, yet one of your wunderkind could only publish in a law review 8 YEARS after getting a phd in an instutitution with tonnes of connections, bright colleagues to critique and make your papers better and 2/2 teaching. I know people who work in a 4/4 with better publications 2 years out. <p> <p>Maybe that tells us cleverness, or potential is just biased garbage. <p> <p>People love talking about structural injustice, but god forbid we go after the structural injustice in our own profession, then the wagons circle. <p> <p>I say we try to keep a long memory for once, let us do a longitudinal survey of all the people hired on "potential" aka with zero publications and see where they end up in 7 years Carla 2018-01-17 05:30:38 I mean, while we're at it, what about Alan Bloom? Now there was a man's man. A real conservative, none of this mamby pamby queerness! Carla 2018-01-17 05:18:57 Lol Harvey Mansfield, what a thinker. <p> <p>It's worth reading Nussbaum's review of his manly man book: https://newrepublic.com/article/64199/man-overboard Leslie 2018-01-17 05:01:30 Grayson Perry, authentic cross-dresser, moral inspiration to Les Green, and sign of the times: <p> <p>http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/resources/images/7078942/ Ruwen 2018-01-17 03:45:13 Does anyone know of more job talks posted online? There are some that look a lot like job talks here: <p> <p>https://www.lps.uci.edu/newsevents/events/index.php Nicola 2018-01-17 03:00:14 The practice of established philosophers hiring new philosophers based on how well they conform to the existing status quo, largely grounded in prestige and "pedigree", seems like it would result is uselessly insular and self-referential back-scratching which is of no consequence to anyone outside the field, barely anyone in it, and makes a perfect target for administrators who eye the yearly budget with a chainsaw. <p> <p>Thank the great heavens that this hasn't happened to philosophy. Saadia 2018-01-17 02:09:19 <blockquote> <p> <p>Ah! The "so and so was hired based on potential" slogan. That motto has been introduced within the last two years or so, and I'm already very tired of hearing it. <p> <p>It's funny: I remember being told when starting graduate school that the consensus was that, in order to be seriously considered for a "research" position, one would have to have publications. The one supposed caveat was if you came from a very top department, but even then, we were told, that may not be enough anymore, especially since there are plenty of candidates who are coming from top departments with publications. But now the story has been changed, and once again we have to throw our previous experiences into the memory-hole, and pretend that we never heard what we did. <p> <p>It's classic doublethink. <p> <p>Tell everyone for years that hiring decisions are based on research productivity, then when it becomes obvious to everyone that isn't really the case, just pretend you never said it, and say that hires are actually made based on "potential." That concept is elastic enough that no hire can ever be questioned, and so now everyone has to accept that any given hire is just. After all, the fact that a particular hire doesn't meet any of the criteria that we were once told determined hiring decisions no longer counts as evidence that the hire is unjust: we're simply told that none of those things are a deciding factor in hiring, because what really matters is "potential." <p> <p>You see, the emperor has no clothes. It is clear as day that these hiring decisions have nothing to do with actual scholarship. And that's fine. But let's all be honest about it rather than living in a fantasy world where we keep trying to rationalize what we all know is a joke. <p> <p><footer>Ruwen</footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>Oh, I knew what you were getting at. I meant it more in the sense of: "Go on, I'm listening... How do I join?" I'm not familiar with your examples, aside from Dembroff, but I agree with what you say in general terms. I'm just surprised you said the Freemasons when there are other (((groups))) with a lot more influence in academia. Ilkka 2018-01-17 01:48:57 <blockquote> <p> <p>And judging by your comment, you can't engage with posts expressing views different from your own. But it's not to late for you. The darkness can still be escaped. <p> <p><blockquote> <p> <p><blockquote> <p> <p>Way to address the substance of our posts. I'm sure your publication in Ratio will take you far. <p> <p><blockquote> <p> <p>Patting one another on the back doesn't prove anything. <p> <p><footer>Ruwen</footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p><footer>Wilhelm <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>Judging from your comment, you're a very prideful and vicious person. I can see why you're doing well for yourself in this profession. <p> <p><footer>Ruwen</footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p><footer>Wilhelm <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>You're not very good at parody, professor. Ruwen 2018-01-16 23:16:48 And judging by your comment, you can't engage with posts expressing views different from your own. But it's not to late for you. The darkness can still be escaped. <p> <p><blockquote> <p> <p><blockquote> <p> <p>Way to address the substance of our posts. I'm sure your publication in Ratio will take you far. <p> <p><blockquote> <p> <p>Patting one another on the back doesn't prove anything. <p> <p><footer>Ruwen</footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p><footer>Wilhelm <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>Judging from your comment, you're a very prideful and vicious person. I can see why you're doing well for yourself in this profession. <p> <p><footer>Ruwen</footer> <p></blockquote> Wilhelm 2018-01-16 23:15:25 <blockquote> <p> <p>Way to address the substance of our posts. I'm sure your publication in Ratio will take you far. <p> <p><blockquote> <p> <p>Patting one another on the back doesn't prove anything. <p> <p><footer>Ruwen</footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p><footer>Wilhelm <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>Judging from your comment, you're a very prideful and vicious person. I can see why you're doing well for yourself in this profession. Ruwen 2018-01-16 23:11:31 Way to address the substance of our posts. I'm sure your publication in Ratio will take you far. <p> <p><blockquote> <p> <p>Patting one another on the back doesn't prove anything. <p> <p><footer>Ruwen</footer> <p></blockquote> Wilhelm 2018-01-16 23:08:35 Patting one another on the back doesn't prove anything. Ruwen 2018-01-16 22:58:38 Don't you understand that it's a black-and-white issue?! No subtlety allowed. <p> <p>When Primus was hired at Georgetown, her colleagues called her job talk brilliant, and in public fora. So it's not farfetched to think that they, and Berkeley, were hiring partly on potential. Sometimes potential pans out, other times it doesn't. But as mentioned above, it's a bet top departments are in the position to make. <p> <p> <blockquote> <p> <p>Look the prestige model is still operative, but it's lost some ground over the last ten years. Some people are lucky and benefit from the prestige model, others are lucky and benefit from the (slightly) more meritocratic model. And lots and lots of other perfectly good candidates just lose out. But it's not like hiring is all one way or all the other way. Conventions and institutions often change slowly, and in fits and starts. You especially have to remember that the emphasis on publications is still very new. It's been gaining steam for ten years, but boomers are slow to adapt to change. So it's hardly universal yet. <p> <p>Besides, it's not like anyone posting here (myself included) has a profile sufficient--on either model--to get hired at Chicago or Berkeley in the first place. If we did, we wouldn't be quite so fucking whiny. Grow some balls, you fucking eunuchs! <p> <p><footer>Jacopo <p></footer> <p></blockquote> Wilhelm 2018-01-16 22:52:43 Look the prestige model is still operative, but it's lost some ground over the last ten years. Some people are lucky and benefit from the prestige model, others are lucky and benefit from the (slightly) more meritocratic model. And lots and lots of other perfectly good candidates just lose out. But it's not like hiring is all one way or all the other way. Conventions and institutions often change slowly, and in fits and starts. You especially have to remember that the emphasis on publications is still very new. It's been gaining steam for ten years, but boomers are slow to adapt to change. So it's hardly universal yet. <p> <p>Besides, it's not like anyone posting here (myself included) has a profile sufficient--on either model--to get hired at Chicago or Berkeley in the first place. If we did, we wouldn't be quite so fucking whiny. Grow some balls, you fucking eunuchs! Jacopo 2018-01-16 22:44:04 Are you new to graduate school, Ruwen? Are you at a low-ranked program? Your post betrays ignorance. <p> <p>I can assure you that 10+ years ago we were advised not to published at my top program. Unless your paper was in Journal of Philosophy or Philosophical Review, we were warned that the search committee might judge our potential to be limited to the journals in which we had already published. Though this is less the norm, I'm told, it isn't an invention of the last two years. <p> <p>And, again, the PhD-granting institution matters. These are Princeton PhDs securing top post-docs and $100,000 grants before securing top jobs. You make a bet, especially when they are the type of candidate you might have a hard time hiring once they have a bigger profile. Personally, I would take one of these candidates any day over a low-ranked PhD who had a handful of papers in places like Acta Analytica or Erkenntnis. As someone else pointed out on another thread, the worst that happens with candidates hired on the basis of potential alone is that they don't make tenure. If you're Yale or Berkeley, you can then try again. You can take bets because you have capital to play with. Having to try again is probably better than being stuck with a colleague who will never writing anything interesting or well-placed in their entire career. Adelard 2018-01-16 22:41:34 It is a very childish view of the world that believes that universities are places that hire people based on their "potential" as scholars. <p> <p>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYQ8d3vdI10 <p> <p>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1wiblpsj-w Ruwen 2018-01-16 22:27:06 Who got the interviews for the York perception job? Dickinson 2018-01-16 22:12:57 <blockquote> <p> <p>Evidence? My modernist friends who've seen her say she's quite good. And she was hired early enough in her career for the hire to be made on the basis of potential. <p> <p><blockquote> <p> <p><blockquote> <p> <p>Primus writes on things like the intellectual love of God in Spinoza. Hardly the front line of social engineering. <p> <p><footer>Wilhelm <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>The focus of her work is not the social engineering. The fact that she was given the job is the social engineering. <p> <p><footer>Ruwen</footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p><footer>Wilhelm <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>Ah! The "so and so was hired based on potential" slogan. That motto has been introduced within the last two years or so, and I'm already very tired of hearing it. <p> <p>It's funny: I remember being told when starting graduate school that the consensus was that, in order to be seriously considered for a "research" position, one would have to have publications. The one supposed caveat was if you came from a very top department, but even then, we were told, that may not be enough anymore, especially since there are plenty of candidates who are coming from top departments with publications. But now the story has been changed, and once again we have to throw our previous experiences into the memory-hole, and pretend that we never heard what we did. <p> <p>It's classic doublethink. <p> <p>Tell everyone for years that hiring decisions are based on research productivity, then when it becomes obvious to everyone that isn't really the case, just pretend you never said it, and say that hires are actually made based on "potential." That concept is elastic enough that no hire can ever be questioned, and so now everyone has to accept that any given hire is just. After all, the fact that a particular hire doesn't meet any of the criteria that we were once told determined hiring decisions no longer counts as evidence that the hire is unjust: we're simply told that none of those things are a deciding factor in hiring, because what really matters is "potential." <p> <p>You see, the emperor has no clothes. It is clear as day that these hiring decisions have nothing to do with actual scholarship. And that's fine. But let's all be honest about it rather than living in a fantasy world where we keep trying to rationalize what we all know is a joke. Ruwen 2018-01-16 22:10:00 <blockquote>the critical theorists who took over key institutions like Columbia</blockquote> <p> <p>i just knew hiring john dewey was part of a long con but i had no idea it was this elaborate. Piero 2018-01-16 21:58:55 <blockquote> <p> <p>The Green thing is mostly wrong, IMO. <p> <p>("Can there be anyone left, even among the bad guys, who does not know that manhood is partly constituted by, and in, the presentation of self?" Uh...yes? Lots of people suddenly *believe* that...but as to whether it's true, and, so, knowable...not so clear. <p>and: <p>"There is a further catch. Part of what it is to be a man, in our culture, is to not affirm or imply that manhood is achieved solely by or in presentation." Not really. Knowing that isn't part of *being a man*--it's part of *understanding what a man is.* Totally different things. It's part of understanding every real thing to understand that it's not purely a matter of representation. (Though part of the problem here is the confused, slippery term "presentation.")) <p> <p>But, anyway, at least it contains this: <p>"...a male cannot just ‘present himself’ into being a woman." Whoa...hold on...are people actually admitting this out loud now? I mean...that's a major version of transgender ideology down the drain if people start admitting *that.* <p> <p><footer>Ruan <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>It seems reasonable to me to say that manliness (as an ideal going beyond biological "maleness") has something to do with the way one presents oneself, assuming that this includes the way one acts, and I don't see how it couldn't. A manly man *behaves* in particular ways that other men (and most women) don't, though the histrionic instinct that is self-conscious about "presentation" does not seem very manly to me. As you say, it really depends what is meant by "presentation." As to your second point, I would think manly men are more likely to understand that being manly is not solely a matter of presentation: witness all the SJW types, without exception women and unmanly men, who seem not to understand this. Whether a manly man must be able to articulate that understanding is another thing, since one can be manly without being very reflective about it, but there is at least an instinctive understanding. Again, I'm really not sure this is even what Green is talking about, but it's a worthwhile discussion in any case, these days especially. Check out Harvey Mansfield's book "Manliness," if you're not too turned off by the Straussians. It's nice that there are still a few manly thinkers alive, although Mansfield is in his eighties... Ilkka 2018-01-16 21:53:21 Evidence? My modernist friends who've seen her say she's quite good. And she was hired early enough in her career for the hire to be made on the basis of potential. <p> <p><blockquote> <p> <p><blockquote> <p> <p>Primus writes on things like the intellectual love of God in Spinoza. Hardly the front line of social engineering. <p> <p><footer>Wilhelm <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>The focus of her work is not the social engineering. The fact that she was given the job is the social engineering. <p> <p><footer>Ruwen</footer> <p></blockquote> Wilhelm 2018-01-16 21:53:16 <blockquote> <p> <p>Primus writes on things like the intellectual love of God in Spinoza. Hardly the front line of social engineering. <p> <p><footer>Wilhelm <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>The focus of her work is not the social engineering. The fact that she was given the job is the social engineering. Ruwen 2018-01-16 21:30:34 Primus writes on things like the intellectual love of God in Spinoza. Hardly the front line of social engineering. Wilhelm 2018-01-16 21:26:29 Ian, if you'd looked at Laurence's CV you'd see he was first a VAP, then Law/Philosophy fellow at Chicago-- not exactly "immediate" employment at a top school. I wouldn't group him with the groomed Princetonians you mention. William 2018-01-16 21:13:03 http://dailycaller.com/2018/01/15/michael-rectenwald-nyu-lawsuit/ Ruwen 2018-01-16 20:48:21 The Green thing is mostly wrong, IMO. <p> <p>("Can there be anyone left, even among the bad guys, who does not know that manhood is partly constituted by, and in, the presentation of self?" Uh...yes? Lots of people suddenly *believe* that...but as to whether it's true, and, so, knowable...not so clear. <p>and: <p>"There is a further catch. Part of what it is to be a man, in our culture, is to not affirm or imply that manhood is achieved solely by or in presentation." Not really. Knowing that isn't part of *being a man*--it's part of *understanding what a man is.* Totally different things. It's part of understanding every real thing to understand that it's not purely a matter of representation. (Though part of the problem here is the confused, slippery term "presentation.")) <p> <p>But, anyway, at least it contains this: <p>"...a male cannot just ‘present himself’ into being a woman." Whoa...hold on...are people actually admitting this out loud now? I mean...that's a major version of transgender ideology down the drain if people start admitting *that.* Ruan 2018-01-16 20:37:47 Grand explanations aren’t needed to explain any of those cases. C’mon. <p> <p>Laurence is mostly owed to the love affair between Pitt and Chicago. Where else can you dabble in Kantian darkness? And Primus and Dembroff had schools bet on their research potential. That happens all the time, especially if the candidate is from a group historically underrepresented in philosophy. Sometimes that bet pays off, sometimes it doesn’t. If you can get them early, you don’t have to compete for them later on. Both too were reasonable bets. Primus is a Princeton PhD who earned the Bersoff, post-doc that strongly correlates with future success. Dembroff is also a Princeton PhD, had a good publication, and had already secured large amounts of grant money. <p> Hassan 2018-01-16 20:24:17 <blockquote> <p> <p><blockquote> <p> <p>And here we go. Les Green is weighing in. On his view, morally depraved indecent behavior is now "performance art." The interesting thing about the piece is that it provides a window into the contortions and dead ends of a reprobate mind. Reading the section where he puzzles through all the "logical" possibilities of the "I present as a man" locution was especially horrifying. <p> <p>https://ljmgreen.com/2018/01/15/on-presenting-as-a-man/ <p> <p><footer>Empedocles <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>Right, but the guy he's talking about actually is a man (or at least a male). I didn't really see the point of Green's piece, but I'm not sure it's making the point you suggest. <p> <p><footer>Ilkka</footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>I don't think even Green knows the point of his own piece! At this point, I think everyone is confused about the what we're supposed to say and believe. It's Babel. Ian 2018-01-16 18:44:23 <blockquote> <p> <p><blockquote> <p> <p><blockquote> <p> <p>Ok, so from 2008-2016 he has 3 chapters in edited books, 1 in a law review (peer reviewed by grad students). Stellar. <p> <p>So yes, between 2008-2011 when he was hired he had 1 chapter in a book and a paper in a law review. Wow. Are these the standards for hiring? Chicago should hire me right now then. <p> <p> <p> <p><footer>Anton <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>Well, they very well may so long as you're a Freemason. <p> <p><footer>Empedocles <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>Go on... <p> <p><footer>Ilkka</footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>You have to ask yourself: how can some people have the thinnest of records yet immediately find employment at a top school such as Berkeley or Yale or Chicago, while at the same time others with extremely impressive records go with nothing at all? There's two systems. <p> <p>There's the public face presented to us (universities are free bastions of research) and then there's the hidden power structure that works behind the scenes (universities are weapons of social manipulation). That's why someone like Robin Dembroff can end up at Yale, or Kristin Primus at Berkeley, or Ben Laurence at Chicago--there are literally dozens (if not hundreds) of additional examples. These positions can receive up to 500 applications: we're to believe that these hiring decisions are based on research productivity and teaching prowess? Obviously not. Universities are a key piece of a control matrix designed to manage and shape public opinion, and that is why some people land at key places without any scholarly justification while others will never get anywhere no matter how accomplished their record becomes. <p> <p>At its core, the modern university system is not about producing intellectual research. It's about social engineering. We're all seeing that now with the advent of what's called the 'SJW" movement. But this movement has its roots in the psychological warfare and mass psychology of think tanks like Tavistock and the critical theorists who took over key institutions like Columbia. It's all synthetic, which is why we have young woman walking around with purple mohawks saying they're a man, and if you disagree, you're now a bigot who will be publicly shamed. We are witnessing the deliberate dismantling of 2000 years of western civilization, and the outrageous philosophy hires we've been witnessing over the last several years are a part of that. The manipulation of the philosophy job market acts as a form of mass demoralization while simultaneously ensuring institutional control. They weed out the philosophers and install the hirelings. Ian 2018-01-16 18:41:09 The description of where the money's going to go sounds like they're mostly going after senior hires... or did I miss read it? Anton 2018-01-16 18:40:56 ^^Elanor Taylor who does phil-sci stuff among other cool work was recently hired. Leucippus 2018-01-16 18:28:50 Hard to say. Michael Williams and Peter Achinstein are both older. Replacing them (and perhaps supplementing the ranks of the faculty with another epistemologist/ philosopher of science) I imagine would be on the list of priorities. Perhaps a senior-level metaphysics person? Leucippus 2018-01-16 18:26:52 8 critical race theorists and an AOS: formal epistemology, AOC: applied ethics hire. Arthur 2018-01-16 18:23:16 <blockquote> <p> <p><blockquote> <p> <p><blockquote> <p> <p>Ok, so from 2008-2016 he has 3 chapters in edited books, 1 in a law review (peer reviewed by grad students). Stellar. <p> <p>So yes, between 2008-2011 when he was hired he had 1 chapter in a book and a paper in a law review. Wow. Are these the standards for hiring? Chicago should hire me right now then. <p> <p> <p> <p><footer>Anton <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>You know nothing about his writing sample at the time, his letters, his work in progress... Also note he's only a lecturer now (I assume he didn't get tenure). And he has two papers forthcoming in top journals. <p> <p><footer>Bernard <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>If we know nothing of his writing sample at the time, that's even stronger proof of the original poster's point. After all, had the sample been so glorious enough to earn the job, surely it should be published by now. <p> <p><footer>Empedocles <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>That's assuming a lot about the publication process Bernard 2018-01-16 18:13:00 So JHU just got $75 million dollars, and they say they're planning to expand their department from 13 faculty members to 22 in the next few years. 9 is a lot of new jobs (for one department, and for our job market). How do you think they'll distribute the AOSes? What areas would they be smart to develop their talent in? William 2018-01-16 18:08:40 ^^in case it wasn't clear, that was pure speculation. I have no actual information concerning why he was demoted. William 2018-01-16 18:06:31 <blockquote> <p> <p>And here we go. Les Green is weighing in. On his view, morally depraved indecent behavior is now "performance art." The interesting thing about the piece is that it provides a window into the contortions and dead ends of a reprobate mind. Reading the section where he puzzles through all the "logical" possibilities of the "I present as a man" locution was especially horrifying. <p> <p>https://ljmgreen.com/2018/01/15/on-presenting-as-a-man/ <p> <p><footer>Empedocles <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>Right, but the guy he's talking about actually is a man (or at least a male). I didn't really see the point of Green's piece, but I'm not sure it's making the point you suggest. Ilkka 2018-01-16 18:06:02 <blockquote> <p> <p>Ok, so from 2008-2016 he has 3 chapters in edited books, 1 in a law review (peer reviewed by grad students). Stellar. <p> <p>So yes, between 2008-2011 when he was hired he had 1 chapter in a book and a paper in a law review. Wow. Are these the standards for hiring? Chicago should hire me right now then. <p> <p> <p> <p><footer>Anton <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>He also went from being an asspro to a lecturer in 2016. That's a demotion, perhaps for not making tenure/5th-year review. He's been granted a lectureship for a year or two as a soft landing while he looks for employment. <p> <p>And since then, he has 1 in PPR and another in PI, which is pretty good. So his file is now much better than it was. Maybe not great for someone almost ten years out, but it shows he can publish pretty consistently, and his publication trajectory is rising. William 2018-01-16 18:05:46 <blockquote> <p> <p><blockquote> <p> <p>Ok, so from 2008-2016 he has 3 chapters in edited books, 1 in a law review (peer reviewed by grad students). Stellar. <p> <p>So yes, between 2008-2011 when he was hired he had 1 chapter in a book and a paper in a law review. Wow. Are these the standards for hiring? Chicago should hire me right now then. <p> <p> <p> <p><footer>Anton <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>Well, they very well may so long as you're a Freemason. <p> <p><footer>Empedocles <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>Go on... Ilkka 2018-01-16 18:03:08 <blockquote> <p> <p><blockquote> <p> <p>Ok, so from 2008-2016 he has 3 chapters in edited books, 1 in a law review (peer reviewed by grad students). Stellar. <p> <p>So yes, between 2008-2011 when he was hired he had 1 chapter in a book and a paper in a law review. Wow. Are these the standards for hiring? Chicago should hire me right now then. <p> <p> <p> <p><footer>Anton <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>You know nothing about his writing sample at the time, his letters, his work in progress... Also note he's only a lecturer now (I assume he didn't get tenure). And he has two papers forthcoming in top journals. <p> <p><footer>Bernard <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>If we know nothing of his writing sample at the time, that's even stronger proof of the original poster's point. After all, had the sample been so glorious enough to earn the job, surely it should be published by now. Empedocles 2018-01-16 17:56:43 And here we go. Les Green is weighing in. On his view, morally depraved indecent behavior is now "performance art." The interesting thing about the piece is that it provides a window into the contortions and dead ends of a reprobate mind. Reading the section where he puzzles through all the "logical" possibilities of the "I present as a man" locution was especially horrifying. <p> <p>https://ljmgreen.com/2018/01/15/on-presenting-as-a-man/ Empedocles 2018-01-16 17:48:09 <blockquote> <p> <p>Ok, so from 2008-2016 he has 3 chapters in edited books, 1 in a law review (peer reviewed by grad students). Stellar. <p> <p>So yes, between 2008-2011 when he was hired he had 1 chapter in a book and a paper in a law review. Wow. Are these the standards for hiring? Chicago should hire me right now then. <p> <p> <p> <p><footer>Anton <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>You know nothing about his writing sample at the time, his letters, his work in progress... Also note he's only a lecturer now (I assume he didn't get tenure). And he has two papers forthcoming in top journals. Bernard 2018-01-16 17:44:21 <blockquote> <p> <p>Ok, so from 2008-2016 he has 3 chapters in edited books, 1 in a law review (peer reviewed by grad students). Stellar. <p> <p>So yes, between 2008-2011 when he was hired he had 1 chapter in a book and a paper in a law review. Wow. Are these the standards for hiring? Chicago should hire me right now then. <p> <p> <p> <p><footer>Anton <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>Well, they very well may so long as you're a Freemason. Empedocles 2018-01-16 17:37:14 Ok, so from 2008-2016 he has 3 chapters in edited books, 1 in a law review (peer reviewed by grad students). Stellar. <p> <p>So yes, between 2008-2011 when he was hired he had 1 chapter in a book and a paper in a law review. Wow. Are these the standards for hiring? Chicago should hire me right now then. <p> <p> Anton 2018-01-16 17:29:20 what do you mean no publications? Bernard 2018-01-16 17:15:29 Does anyone have intel on San Diego State? Someone commented on the wiki asking if the search was actually successful or cancelled. Ernst 2018-01-16 17:14:36 http://philosophy.uchicago.edu/faculty/files/laurence/Laurence_CV_12_28_2016.pdf <p>Can someone explain what exactly happened here? Did Chicago hire this guy with absolutely no publications. Then he went on to publish nothing? Anton 2018-01-16 16:56:02 That's fine. I used to be a Christian too and I'm glad revision was an option. But she should own up to her old beliefs and quit trying to hide them, e.g., by not even listing her Biola background on her CV. <p> <p> <p><blockquote> <p> <p>What's so hard to believe that someone, from conservative beginnings, gave conservatism their best shot and then decided it wasn't for them? <p> I can assure you that RD is no trojan horse. They are an old-fashioned case of belief revision. <blockquote> <p> <p>Maybe she is setting up a Trojan horse. <p> <p><footer>Wilhelm <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p><footer>Marcel <p></footer> <p></blockquote> Wilhelm 2018-01-16 12:09:53 The dog course still sounds better than the SJW one. Elliott 2018-01-16 07:55:26 There's a growing trend of unconventional intro courses, and I think it's glad that we're talking about it. http://philosophymetablog.blogspot.com/2018/01/introduction-to-philosophy-using-my-dog.html Uisang 2018-01-16 06:44:34 The plural refers to RD's identity as a normal, healthy and sane human being, perhaps as "Anakin Skywalker" relates to "Darth Vader". Hermann 2018-01-16 05:42:21 Someone should tell the Yale student paper about those blog posts. See if they raise a stink. Wilhelm 2018-01-16 04:44:23 https://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/an-open-letter-to-wikipedia <p> <p><blockquote> <p> <p>"Celeste Kidd" can't be real, she must surely be a Philip Roth character... <p> <p><footer>Giovanni <p></footer> <p></blockquote> Georges-Louis 2018-01-16 02:38:47 Shocking behavior. Except that it isn’t. Elijah 2018-01-16 02:17:44 <blockquote> <p> <p>What's so hard to believe that someone, from conservative beginnings, gave conservatism their best shot and then decided it wasn't for them? <p> I can assure you that RD is no trojan horse. They are an old-fashioned case of belief revision. <blockquote> <p> <p>Maybe she is setting up a Trojan horse. <p> <p><footer>Wilhelm <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p><footer>Marcel <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>"They"? She has a siamese twin we don't know about? Benedetto 2018-01-15 23:06:18 "was found to have plagiarized from philosopher Sir Anthony Kenny and Pope John Paul II." <p> <p>http://dailynous.com/2018/01/15/peter-j-schulz-plagiarizes-caught-philosophy-class/ Ioan 2018-01-15 22:38:21 UConn?! Adelard 2018-01-15 22:32:11 What's so hard to believe that someone, from conservative beginnings, gave conservatism their best shot and then decided it wasn't for them? <p> I can assure you that RD is no trojan horse. They are an old-fashioned case of belief revision. <blockquote> <p> <p>Maybe she is setting up a Trojan horse. <p> <p><footer>Wilhelm <p></footer> <p></blockquote> Marcel 2018-01-15 22:31:28 <blockquote> <p> <p>Instead of making up strawmen for your argument, how about you actually engage with what philosopher's actually think about the first person authority of transpeople https://philpapers.org/rec/BETTIA <p> <p><footer>Noah <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>Wait...that's *not* the strawman? Ruan 2018-01-15 21:57:07 "Celeste Kidd" can't be real, she must surely be a Philip Roth character... Giovanni 2018-01-15 21:50:11 <blockquote> <p> <p>It's happening. So timely: <p> <p>http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-42652947 <p> <p> <p> <p> <p><footer>Blasius <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>News like this brings a smile to my face. Christians know the whole world lies in wickedness, and now everyone who has tried to live away from God is being forced to confront the consequences of a society that has gone its own way. The world is now a total joke. That's why when you walk around campus, those serious philosophers look like garbage: dread, anxiety, confusion, worry, etc.. I would imagine that even they're starting to realize that their entire life has been a lie. They sowed to the flesh, and now they have nothing to show for it. Fredric 2018-01-15 21:01:02 It's happening. So timely: <p> <p>http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-42652947 <p> <p> <p> Blasius 2018-01-15 20:51:08 Maybe she is setting up a Trojan horse. Wilhelm 2018-01-15 20:16:43 "Robin Dembroff is a student at the Torrey Honors Institute at Biola University, pursuing degrees in Philosophy and English Literature. Her writing has been recognized by the Visalia Times Delta, Ayn Rand Institute, Michael L. Roston Creative Writing Contest, Torn Curtain – The Zine, Biola English Guild’s St. John the Apostle Paper Conference, and the Biola History/Gov’t/Social Science Department’s J.O. Henry Award." <p> <p>WOW Gillian 2018-01-15 20:06:39 <blockquote> <p> <p><blockquote> <p> <p>Is RD the RD from this book? <p> <p>https://www.amazon.com/Proud-Be-Right-Conservative-Generation/dp/B005DICHUA <p> <p><footer>Svetozar <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>wait, are you telling me Robin has been engeneering a mega-hoax and she will reveal she was never sexually confused AFTER she gets tenure at Yale, thereby showing Yale Phil. dept. is a Barnum circus? <p> <p>If yes, she has my unlimited admiration! <p> <p><footer>Hibat <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>Impossible! Due to his work on propaganda, Jazz is also an expert in counterinsurgency and psychological warfare. He'd had sniffed out a mole long ago were Robin one. Then again, maybe the Lord has blinded him, and Robin sneaked through the cracks, and the entire Yale Department is going to exposed for the joke that it is. But in either case, Yale has humiliated itself. Fredric 2018-01-15 19:51:37 "In a January 2017 BCS faculty meeting, without naming names, DeAngelis told the group that he believed that he had been deceived and manipulated after he had reviewed emails from those who had complained about Jaeger to the University. Cantlon took his remarks to be referring to her, as well as Aslin, and was outraged. Later, it was asserted that DeAngelis' remarks constituted retaliation for their having complained about Jaeger and participated in the investigation. The revelation and discussion of the emails caused the BCS faculty to become further divided. All subsequent efforts to repair the faculty relationships in BCS have also been unsuccessful." <p> <p>"A number of BCS faculty and members of the University Administration have found the claimants' unrelenting pursuit of this matter, which the University believed it had thoroughly, fairly and in good faith investigated and resolved under its established procedures, both frustrating and inexplicable." Donald 2018-01-15 19:35:26 According to the report, Celeste Kidd, Jaeger's main accuser and spearhead of the witch hunt, as well as other faculty in the department pursuing their own agendas and rivalries, spread vicious rumors, withheld and manipulated evidence, issued threats, attempted to coerce and suborn witnesses -- in other words, another Northwestern clusterfuck all over again. The difference here was that Rochester refused to knuckle under to the mob. Aristippus 2018-01-15 19:10:49 Leiter links to the report, which is very interesting and cost UR at least $4.5 million. <p> <p>http://urindependentinvestigation.net/ <p> <p>tl;dr: Jaeger behaved badly but did not violate UR policy at the time; colleagues got kind of obsessed with the case; things went downhill. BUT this gives us Rich Feldman as interim president, which is pretty neat. <p> Moses 2018-01-15 18:15:12 Cul brûlé a la Nietzsche? Zongmi 2018-01-15 18:05:28 What's the acceptance rate for those who identify as both men and women? He he ho ho, this heteronormatity has got to go. Emil 2018-01-15 15:45:17 http://theamericanscene.com/2010/11/24/-the-conservative-gene-by-robin-a-dembroff Buddhaghosa 2018-01-15 15:45:14 It seems like the only place in liberal academia today where a gender binary of male and female is still acceptable is in manuscript submission discussions. In other contexts, to divide all into M or F would be seen as exclusionary and offensive. Cooper 2018-01-15 15:24:20 Once again: <p> <p>https://web.archive.org/web/20110703124440/http://evangelicaloutpost.com/archives/2010/01/i-said-you-said-ze-said-2.html <p> <p>"I Said, You Said, Ze Said <p> <p>CULTURE, EDUCATION — BY ROBIN DEMBROFF ON JANUARY 19, 2010 AT 12:07 AM . . . Voltaire 2018-01-15 15:21:02 So she moved from one form of zealotry to another? From gun toting conservative Christian to rabid SJW. These people really are unhinged. Franz 2018-01-15 15:12:07 Liao: "Hey, people, check out this course I designed which does not provide an introduction to philosophy, but is instead just an upper level course in race and feminism. I teach this as intro to philosophy. If someone did the equivalent upper level course in political philosophy, aesthetics, metaphysics of morality, pragmatics of language, or whatnot, we'd all recognize it's not intro to philosophy and it wouldn't be an issue. But because this class is about race and sexism, I'm basically daring you to tell me it's not intro to philosophy, and then I can impugn your motives and moral virtue." <p> Francesco 2018-01-15 14:54:02 <blockquote> <p> <p>Is RD the RD from this book? <p> <p>https://www.amazon.com/Proud-Be-Right-Conservative-Generation/dp/B005DICHUA <p> <p><footer>Svetozar <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>wait, are you telling me Robin has been engeneering a mega-hoax and she will reveal she was never sexually confused AFTER she gets tenure at Yale, thereby showing Yale Phil. dept. is a Barnum circus? <p> <p>If yes, she has my unlimited admiration! Hibat 2018-01-15 14:53:59 Is RD the RD from this book? <p> <p>https://www.amazon.com/Proud-Be-Right-Conservative-Generation/dp/B005DICHUA Svetozar 2018-01-15 14:06:18 <blockquote> <p> <p><blockquote> <p> <p>I think Spencer Case, Tim Hsiao, Philippe Lemoine and their acolytes should stop contributing anonymously to this cesspool. <p> <p><footer>Clarembald <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>Like the others here, why are you willing to name and mock people without being willing to undergo the same treatment yourself? It's not good when people do this to lefties (this entire thread is morally outrageous and repulsive), but it's also not good when people do this to their critics. In fact, unlike you and the rest here, people like Robin, Spencer, and Philippe (don't know about Tim) have enough courage and integrity to put themselves out there by name, despite knowing the treatment that they will get in places like this by people like you. <p> <p><footer>Bonnie</footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>Helping this blog self-destruct. You're welcome. Jamal 2018-01-15 13:54:46 The irony is that this thread will help RD’s tenure case. Godfrey 2018-01-15 11:40:00 <blockquote> <p> <p>I think Spencer Case, Tim Hsiao, Philippe Lemoine and their acolytes should stop contributing anonymously to this cesspool. <p> <p><footer>Clarembald <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>You forgot Chad McI from Cornell Mario 2018-01-15 10:39:25 Nair Bretiel puts it best, but there is always something to get excited about in Sitjun Grebniewski. And with cream on top. Alf 2018-01-15 03:27:24 <blockquote> <p> <p>One's thing for sure, if anyone still had doubts, Dembroff's work is generating a lot of genuine, substantial discussion. Right here. Unlike, it's safe to suppose, nearly everybody's work here. That's Dembroff was (and deserved to be) hired and most of you will never be (and don't). <p> <p><footer>Clarembald <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>if it were not for this gender craziness taking siege in some parts of the West and her social elevation as a transgender person herself, her work wouldn't get much attention at all. i therefore find it difficult to see that she deserved the hire. She was hired, at best, for reasons largely outside of her effort and outside the quality of her work. Carlo 2018-01-15 03:21:40 <blockquote> <p> <p>I think Spencer Case, Tim Hsiao, Philippe Lemoine and their acolytes should stop contributing anonymously to this cesspool. <p> <p><footer>Clarembald <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>Like the others here, why are you willing to name and mock people without being willing to undergo the same treatment yourself? It's not good when people do this to lefties (this entire thread is morally outrageous and repulsive), but it's also not good when people do this to their critics. In fact, unlike you and the rest here, people like Robin, Spencer, and Philippe (don't know about Tim) have enough courage and integrity to put themselves out there by name, despite knowing the treatment that they will get in places like this by people like you. Bonnie 2018-01-15 03:19:48 I think Spencer Case, Tim Hsiao, Philippe Lemoine and their acolytes should stop contributing anonymously to this cesspool. Clarembald 2018-01-15 02:06:50 "The wicked shall see it, and be grieved; he shall gnash with his teeth, and melt away: the desire of the wicked shall perish." Psalm 112:10 <p> Fredric 2018-01-15 01:38:11 When your work is a jargon-laden defense of how to be a psychologically ill homo you don't have much to be proud of no matter how much discussion it generates. In fact you should be quite ashamed at your contributions to a decadent and infantile society which takes a preoccupation with sex and other empty pleasures as its highest ends. <p> <p>Truly shameful. Hsiung 2018-01-15 01:18:03 Then again, Yale produced the Skull and Bonesman George Bush, so in a way it's fitting that maybe one of the most absurd hires in the history of academic philosophy should take place there. When the controllers decide to rub it everyone's faces, they sure do go big. Fredric 2018-01-15 00:36:52 <blockquote> <p> <p>One's thing for sure, if anyone still had doubts, Dembroff's work is generating a lot of genuine, substantial discussion. Right here. Unlike, it's safe to suppose, nearly everybody's work here. That's Dembroff was (and deserved to be) hired and most of you will never be (and don't). <p> <p><footer>Clarembald <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>No, Robin. Everyone is tearing your "work" to shreds with satire and baby logic. But that has to happen here anonymously because if anyone tried it on you at a conference, they'd be accused of bigotry and summarily dismissed from the profession. But you know that. I don't believe even you think you truly deserved the job at Yale. Fredric 2018-01-15 00:30:44 Also, I realized I accidentally wrote "LBGT" rather than "LGBT." That got me to thinking. Is the ordering of the acronym perhaps a veiled microaggression? Why not "BTGL" or "TGBL" or "BLTG" or "GTBL" or-------------you get the point. Why not just simply the whole matter and reduce things to the acronym "X' where "X" just means anything abnormal? That would make it easier for everyone. Fredric 2018-01-15 00:28:44 that's WHY Clarembald 2018-01-15 00:26:56 One's thing for sure, if anyone still had doubts, Dembroff's work is generating a lot of genuine, substantial discussion. Right here. Unlike, it's safe to suppose, nearly everybody's work here. That's Dembroff was (and deserved to be) hired and most of you will never be (and don't). Clarembald 2018-01-15 00:26:36 <blockquote> <p> <p>I remember when it was still "gay and lesbian." Feels bad, man. <p> <p>Gay -> Gay and Lesbian -> GLB -> LGB -> LGBT -> LGBTQ -> LGBTQ+ -> LGGBDTTTIQQAAPP <p> <p>Last one is not a joke, I'm afraid (scroll down): https://www.buzzfeed.com/ishmaeldaro/stephen-ledrew-suspended-after-going-on-fox-news?utm_term=.jf19LPJ20#.wd083wvRQ <p> <p>They will never admit that the only reason all these different "identities" are grouped together is because they're all abnormal. "Sexual deviants" would cover the same group much more easily; "deviant" isn't even necessarily pejorative. <p> <p><footer>Ilkka</footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>Right? I remember not too long ago when people looked at the LBGT acronym and were like "What's the 't" stand for?" No one even knew what it meant. Now you're Hitler if you think a man is a man and a woman is a woman. In a way it's almost fascinating to see how rapid the descent into total chaos has been. Things that were literally unthinkable ten, even five years ago, are now presented as though they're obvious--"you don't think someone born a man can't be a woman just because he says so: bigot!" It's like the last 2,000 years of western civilization has been plunged into a memory-hole without comment, and anyone who isn't brain dead or cowardly enough to not go along with the program is considered a wack job. As bad as it is, you have to admit the end times are good for the jokes. It's pretty hilarious to watch the world make a total mockery of itself. Fredric 2018-01-15 00:18:27 I remember when it was still "gay and lesbian." Feels bad, man. <p> <p>Gay -> Gay and Lesbian -> GLB -> LGB -> LGBT -> LGBTQ -> LGBTQ+ -> LGGBDTTTIQQAAPP <p> <p>Last one is not a joke, I'm afraid (scroll down): https://www.buzzfeed.com/ishmaeldaro/stephen-ledrew-suspended-after-going-on-fox-news?utm_term=.jf19LPJ20#.wd083wvRQ <p> <p>They will never admit that the only reason all these different "identities" are grouped together is because they're all abnormal. "Sexual deviants" would cover the same group much more easily; "deviant" isn't even necessarily pejorative. Ilkka 2018-01-15 00:07:08 Your last paragraph points to an interesting necessary condition on a theory of sexual orientation. <p> <p>(NCSO) Necessarily, if persons A and B have the same sexual orientation R, then it must be possible for A to be R-attracted to B and B to A. <p> <p>To paragraph your point, RD's theory violates (NCSO) because it predicts that a heterosexual man and a lesbian woman can have the same orientation. So RD's theory is false. Marcel 2018-01-15 00:05:27 <blockquote> <p> <p>I do know what it's like to be trans because I announced my transition this morning to my cat. It's been a blissful existence except for all the men who strangely don't seem all that excited by my Tinder photos. Come and get it Boston! Got your Masshole right here! <p> <p><footer>Archytas <p></footer> <p></blockquote> <p> <p>That's called the cotton ceiling. It shows the true colors of the cis assholes. If they weren't transphobes, they'd want to have sex with you. <p> <p>[It does show that they don't believe that you are really a woman. No BSing about engorgement. <p> <p>RD thinks that the new notion of sexual orientation should include a category for the opposite, for people who are mainly attracted to transwomen or transmen. Somehow she doesn't see this as a reductio of the theory. It's a fucking fetish. It doesn't even come close to tracking the notion of sexual orientation. Say I'm mainly oriented to little people, or women with huge asses, or red heads, or chicks with dicks. These "druthers" can't be ignored while still keeping a special category for those who like trans and not the real thing. It's such a dumb paper. <p> <p>I'm not sure how the LGB people ever let the T in. As a final insult RD's notion of sexual orientation just wipes it out. Your sex is irrelevant; what matters is the object. A strait man and a lesbian have the same orientation on her theory. Ya, in a pointing sense, but that's not the notion we work with. It pretty clearly overlooks some important stuff. . . .] Joachim 2018-01-14 23:33:27 I do know what it's like to be trans because I announced my transition this morning to my cat. It's been a blissful existence except for all the men who strangely don't seem all that excited by my Tinder photos. Come and get it Boston! Got your Masshole right here! Archytas 2018-01-14 22:15:11