philosophy meta-forum

Oxford Chairs: Ofra Magidor, Ruth Chang

Hartry

36 day(s) ago

Is there any explanation for these appointments other than gender/racial preferences? Does anyone know what is going on at Oxford?

Carneades

36 day(s) ago

Oxford jumped the shark a while ago.

But there is always good news: juice boxes and oranges for everyone! Yay! Social justice!

Bernhard

36 day(s) ago

Well, at least they aren't extreme lightweights, but still, the likes of Oxford should hire the best our discipline has to offer, nothing less. And the only social justice acceptable at that kind of place is a course taught by Sandel.

Stanley

36 day(s) ago

Does anyone know what is going on at Oxford?

Hartry

Yes, the same thing that is going on everywhere else too - the profession is destroying itself.

Anaxagoras

36 day(s) ago

I thought McMahan is in a relationship with Chang, therefore she is coming with him.

Thoralf

36 day(s) ago

I thought McMahan is in a relationship with Chang, therefore she is coming with him.

Anaxagoras

No.

Definitely not.

Bertrand

35 day(s) ago

how much do you make as a Waynflete professor of philosophy? 120k GBP?

Anicius

35 day(s) ago

how much do you make as a Waynflete professor of philosophy? 120k GBP?

Bertrand

Promoted from within as she was, not that much. Maybe 65K GBP?

T.

35 day(s) ago

Anyone following the FB discussing of Chang's appointment?

Huston

35 day(s) ago

Anyone following the FB discussing of Chang's appointment?

T.

No, but I'd be interested in a summary. Who is discussing it?

Cleanthes

35 day(s) ago

No, T, but I'm not on there. What is being said? I don't know anything about Magidor, but I agree with Leiter about Chang. It's ludicrous that they couldn't find an actual philosopher of law to fill that position. Hart, Dworkin, Gardner, ...Chang? Really?

Nikolai

35 day(s) ago

Magidor and Chang are both better philosophers than anyone who posts on here is or ever will be (let's just acknowledge that so we don't need to listen to people who want to talk shit), but I agree that Chang is a non-ideal appointment for the post. She's great and I can see that if you're distributing chairs there is a case for using it to get the best person if there's not an amazing philosopher of law that you can appoint, but I think it's sad that Oxford didn't find the right post for Chang and appoint a top philosopher of law to that chair.

Emerich

35 day(s) ago

Magidor and Chang are both better philosophers than anyone who posts on here is or ever will be (let's just acknowledge that so we don't need to listen to people who want to talk shit), but I agree that Chang is a non-ideal appointment for the post. She's great and I can see that if you're distributing chairs there is a case for using it to get the best person if there's not an amazing philosopher of law that you can appoint, but I think it's sad that Oxford didn't find the right post for Chang and appoint a top philosopher of law to that chair.

Nikolai

Magidor's a better philosopher than anyone who posts here? You can't be serious.

Half the people in the room at Oxford, including many of the graduate students, are superior philosophers to her.

Posidonius

35 day(s) ago

Magidor and Chang are both better philosophers than anyone who posts on here is or ever will be (let's just acknowledge that so we don't need to listen to people who want to talk shit), but I agree that Chang is a non-ideal appointment for the post. She's great and I can see that if you're distributing chairs there is a case for using it to get the best person if there's not an amazing philosopher of law that you can appoint, but I think it's sad that Oxford didn't find the right post for Chang and appoint a top philosopher of law to that chair.

Nikolai

Magidor's a better philosopher than anyone who posts here? You can't be serious.

Half the people in the room at Oxford, including many of the graduate students, are superior philosophers to her.

Emerich

Lol - Emerich gives us either parody of a very serious case of resentment, much like this entire thread. Extremely pathetic stuff.

Cynthia

35 day(s) ago

Magidor and Chang are both better philosophers than anyone who posts on here is or ever will be

Nikolai

Yeah! And every other diversity at every other level is too, right?

Pseudo-Dionysius

35 day(s) ago

Magidor and Chang are both better philosophers than anyone who posts on here is or ever will be

Nikolai

Yeah! And every other diversity at every other level is too, right?

Cynthia

Plausibly, yeah.

Emerich

35 day(s) ago

Magidor and Chang are both better philosophers than anyone who posts on here is or ever will be (let's just acknowledge that so we don't need to listen to people who want to talk shit), but I agree that Chang is a non-ideal appointment for the post. She's great and I can see that if you're distributing chairs there is a case for using it to get the best person if there's not an amazing philosopher of law that you can appoint, but I think it's sad that Oxford didn't find the right post for Chang and appoint a top philosopher of law to that chair.

Nikolai

Magidor's a better philosopher than anyone who posts here? You can't be serious.

Half the people in the room at Oxford, including many of the graduate students, are superior philosophers to her.

Emerich

Lol - Emerich gives us either parody of a very serious case of resentment, much like this entire thread. Extremely pathetic stuff.

Posidonius

The "resentment" slogan is losing its lister quick. When the hires are so bad that everyone knows what is and above is true, no one is buying the excuses and deflections. Shame on anyone in this profession who is supporting the decline of philosophy. It could be something beautiful and a force for good, but instead it's being destroyed. The fact that you don't seem to care speaks volumes about the state of your own heart.

Emerich

35 day(s) ago

Sorry for the typos--I was on the phone.

Michèle

35 day(s) ago

No, T, but I'm not on there. What is being said? I don't know anything about Magidor, but I agree with Leiter about Chang. It's ludicrous that they couldn't find an actual philosopher of law to fill that position. Hart, Dworkin, Gardner, ...Chang? Really?

Cleanthes

Can we step back from this case and think about the general issue? If you had the power to decide who got a chair that's a chair in area X, you are struggling to appoint someone in X that's great, and you have a philosopher you could appoint only by giving them a chair who is superior to those who will come to work on X, is it obvious that you don't give the chair to the best philosopher you can appoint?

(How much can we assume about Oxford's power to attract top talent to the UK? Wouldn't the pay and workload be worse at Oxford than R1 institutions in the states? I can't tell from the above whether the problem is a judgment about the particular philosopher, a judgment about letting a chair in X go to someone who isn't working in that area, and whether the problem is being framed in the wrong way because of unreasonable assumptions about who Oxford can poach. (I sort of assume that they can get top people in the UK or the handful of people willing to move to the UK at a cut in salary and/or increase in workload--I might be wrong in this.))

Cleanthes

35 day(s) ago

My complaint--and I thought Leiter's complaint--was just that Chang does not work in the area to which this chair is dedicated. I suppose I do take it as obvious that a jurisprudence chair (especially one this prestigious) should go to someone in philosophy of law, though it's fair to ask the questions you do. If they were truly having an impossible time finding, say, a top 50 philosopher of law to take the position, maybe that changes things? I hadn't heard any rumblings of such difficulties, but it's possible I am just not sufficiently in the loop. Their problems filling the Chichele chair were very widely known.

Meister

34 day(s) ago

Magidor and Chang are both better philosophers than anyone who posts on here is or ever will be (let's just acknowledge that so we don't need to listen to people who want to talk shit), but I agree that Chang is a non-ideal appointment for the post. She's great and I can see that if you're distributing chairs there is a case for using it to get the best person if there's not an amazing philosopher of law that you can appoint, but I think it's sad that Oxford didn't find the right post for Chang and appoint a top philosopher of law to that chair.

Nikolai

Magidor's a better philosopher than anyone who posts here? You can't be serious.

Half the people in the room at Oxford, including many of the graduate students, are superior philosophers to her.

Emerich

With two papers in Nous? Explain plz.

Hastings

34 day(s) ago

My complaint--and I thought Leiter's complaint--was just that Chang does not work in the area to which this chair is dedicated. I suppose I do take it as obvious that a jurisprudence chair (especially one this prestigious) should go to someone in philosophy of law, though it's fair to ask the questions you do. If they were truly having an impossible time finding, say, a top 50 philosopher of law to take the position, maybe that changes things? I hadn't heard any rumblings of such difficulties, but it's possible I am just not sufficiently in the loop. Their problems filling the Chichele chair were very widely known.

Cleanthes

Word on the street is that part of Leiter's complaint is that he wished the chair had gone to... someone closer to home.

Emerich

34 day(s) ago

Magidor and Chang are both better philosophers than anyone who posts on here is or ever will be (let's just acknowledge that so we don't need to listen to people who want to talk shit), but I agree that Chang is a non-ideal appointment for the post. She's great and I can see that if you're distributing chairs there is a case for using it to get the best person if there's not an amazing philosopher of law that you can appoint, but I think it's sad that Oxford didn't find the right post for Chang and appoint a top philosopher of law to that chair.

Nikolai

Magidor's a better philosopher than anyone who posts here? You can't be serious.

Half the people in the room at Oxford, including many of the graduate students, are superior philosophers to her.

Emerich

With two papers in Nous? Explain plz.

Meister

Who cares? Everyone knows the journal system is a sham.

And in any case, anyone who has seen her in action in a seminar situation knows the emperor has no clothes.

Alison

34 day(s) ago

My complaint--and I thought Leiter's complaint--was just that Chang does not work in the area to which this chair is dedicated. I suppose I do take it as obvious that a jurisprudence chair (especially one this prestigious) should go to someone in philosophy of law, though it's fair to ask the questions you do. If they were truly having an impossible time finding, say, a top 50 philosopher of law to take the position, maybe that changes things? I hadn't heard any rumblings of such difficulties, but it's possible I am just not sufficiently in the loop. Their problems filling the Chichele chair were very widely known.

Cleanthes

People at Oxford say the shortlist included Endicot, Leiter, and Marmor, all philosophers of law, though at some point in the process Leiter withdrew. The other rumor at Oxford is that the electoral board was quite divided, and it was the non- philosophers who threw the vote to Chang.

Frank

34 day(s) ago

Magidor and Chang are both better philosophers than anyone who posts on here is or ever will be (let's just acknowledge that so we don't need to listen to people who want to talk shit), but I agree that Chang is a non-ideal appointment for the post. She's great and I can see that if you're distributing chairs there is a case for using it to get the best person if there's not an amazing philosopher of law that you can appoint, but I think it's sad that Oxford didn't find the right post for Chang and appoint a top philosopher of law to that chair.

Nikolai

Magidor's a better philosopher than anyone who posts here? You can't be serious.

Half the people in the room at Oxford, including many of the graduate students, are superior philosophers to her.

Emerich

With two papers in Nous? Explain plz.

Meister

Who cares? Everyone knows the journal system is a sham.

And in any case, anyone who has seen her in action in a seminar situation knows the emperor has no clothes.

Emerich

Such sad garbage, with nothing but innuendo and vitriol to back it up. Emerich is cowardly and resentful. Journals and prestigious appointments track quality, including in these cases, and baseless anonymous assertions from people whose own quality is of course under wraps adds absolutely nothing to our knowledge of these cases.

Frank

34 day(s) ago

My complaint--and I thought Leiter's complaint--was just that Chang does not work in the area to which this chair is dedicated. I suppose I do take it as obvious that a jurisprudence chair (especially one this prestigious) should go to someone in philosophy of law, though it's fair to ask the questions you do. If they were truly having an impossible time finding, say, a top 50 philosopher of law to take the position, maybe that changes things? I hadn't heard any rumblings of such difficulties, but it's possible I am just not sufficiently in the loop. Their problems filling the Chichele chair were very widely known.

Cleanthes

People at Oxford say the shortlist included Endicot, Leiter, and Marmor, all philosophers of law, though at some point in the process Leiter withdrew. The other rumor at Oxford is that the electoral board was quite divided, and it was the non-philosophers who threw the vote to Chang.

Alison

#peoplearesaying

Cleanthes

34 day(s) ago

Yeah...if that's true that they could have appointed Endicott or Marmor (and you would think the former at least would be unlikely to turn down a local promotion), this really stinks. And you hardly need to have been another candidate passed over for the position to see it.

Dong

34 day(s) ago

I have 0 papers in Nous.

Placide

34 day(s) ago

My complaint--and I thought Leiter's complaint--was just that Chang does not work in the area to which this chair is dedicated. I suppose I do take it as obvious that a jurisprudence chair (especially one this prestigious) should go to someone in philosophy of law, though it's fair to ask the questions you do. If they were truly having an impossible time finding, say, a top 50 philosopher of law to take the position, maybe that changes things? I hadn't heard any rumblings of such difficulties, but it's possible I am just not sufficiently in the loop. Their problems filling the Chichele chair were very widely known.

Cleanthes

People at Oxford say the shortlist included Endicot, Leiter, and Marmor, all philosophers of law, though at some point in the process Leiter withdrew. The other rumor at Oxford is that the electoral board was quite divided, and it was the non-philosophers who threw the vote to Chang.

Alison

One reason to be skeptical of this account is that BL would have been way more pissed than his brief blog comment about the appointment suggested. Chang has to be the least qualified person on that list for the Chair.

Aleksei

34 day(s) ago

King's appointed Sherrilyn Roush (an epistemologist) to a chair in philosophy and medicine. That didn't work out and she moved to UCLA. It sounds like a similar thing is happening here.

posts per page.