How Professors Think: Inside the Curious World of Academic Judgment

(nextflipdebug5) #1

  1. Pointing to the variety of approaches and substantive issues within
    contemporary American philosophy, Leiter (2004) notes that analytical phi-
    losophy remains widely influential mostly as “a style that emphasizes ‘logic,’
    ‘rigor,’ and ‘argument.’” ThePhilosophical Gourmet Report,which provides in-
    formation on disciplinary ranking, suggests that substantive work in analyti-
    cal philosophy had largely ended by the 1970s, so that “analytical simply de-
    marcates a style of scholarship, writing, and thinking: Clarity, precision, and
    argumentative rigor are paramount.” http://www.philosophicalgourmet.com
    (accessed October 20, 2006). Pragmatism and continental philosophy appear
    to be marginal to the field of philosophy today, so much so that the study re-
    spondents did not even mention either one.

  2. See the American Philosophical Association’s “Statements on the
    Profession” at http://www.apa.udel.edu/apa/governance/statements/research
    .html.

  3. As Chapter 4 explains, well-functioning panels adhere to “customary
    rules,” including deference to disciplinary expertise. The kind of behavior that
    this philosopher attributes to the geographer violates this important guide-
    line, and so signals the panel’s troubled dynamics.

  4. A widely publicized letter to the executive director of the American
    Philosophical Association, written by John Lachs (Vanderbilt University) after
    he had served on philosophy panels for the National Endowment for the Hu-
    manities, notes that the contentiousness of panelists often translates into
    fewer grants for this discipline—Lachs was a leader of a “pluralist revolt”
    within the American Philosophical Association. As a Santayana scholar, he is
    rather at odds with the analytical tradition. See http://www.apa.udel.edu/apa/
    governance/edletters/.

  5. The decline of philosophy as a discipline is often discussed on the
    blog Philosophy Talk. See, for example, theblog.philosophytalk.org/2006/08/
    the_future_of_p.html (accessed May 29, 2008). On the increasing rigidity of
    standards in philosophy, see Putnam (1997).

  6. On canonization and the canon war, see especially Bryson’s (2005)
    analysis of the controversy’s framing in English departments. Also see
    Guillory (1993), Graff (1992), and Palumbo-Liu (1995). One driving force be-
    hind the canon war is the push to teach literature so that it reflects the diver-
    sity of the American college population.

  7. Lamont (1987); also Lamont and Wuthnow (1990). French literary


272 / Notes to Pages 65–70

Free download pdf