ciplines garner awards much less frequently—in part because these
are small fields that generate far fewer applicants—may feel less
magnanimous. Two philosophers were described by their fellow pan-
elists as very eager to see their discipline represented on the lists of
awardees. An inverse relationship between generosity toward other
disciplines and scarcity may contribute to important differences in
the degree to which members of different disciplines engage in disin-
terested behavior.^31
Some panelists point out that favoring one’s own discipline can be
the unintentional result of knowing much more about that field and
thus being better able to form an opinion. A musicologist, though,
echoing the panel chair quoted earlier who noted that “people tend
to be really tough on their [own] discipline,” recalls that on her
panel, “people cast a particularly critical eye on work from their own
field, in part because they knew the field and could evaluate the
claims more effectively than a non-specialist.” Regardless of the mo-
tive for favoring one’s discipline, doing so can have significant nega-
tive consequences. Panelists often lose credibility by pushing their
own fields. A historian of France describes the panelist he liked least
as someone who is “very interested in pushing her own field and is
not as open to other fields. As she said herself, she’s pushing time pe-
riods, you know, she’ll sponsor anything in the Middle Ages, that
kind of thing.” Being able to sway colleagues’ opinion and gain sup-
port for a proposal depends on the overall amount of credibility that
one has accumulated. Respecting all the customary rules increases
one’s credibility with colleagues, in addition to promoting condi-
tions for fair decision making.
The Limits of Legitimacy: Violating the Rules
The taken-for-granted character of customary rules is evidenced when
these rules are perceived as being broken, or when they are moot.^32
Three of the twelve panels studied experienced disagreements im-
Pragmatic Fairness / 137