July 10, 2009

Pope Benedict

The new encyclical "charity in truth" is HERE. There's a lot of interesting philosophy in the whole document.

For me it's weird to read this given that I teach, work with, and am related to a number of American "conservative" Catholics. Here Pope Benedict unambiguously supports labor unions and social welfare in a way clearly inconsistent with the entire thrust of the Republican party since Reagan:

From the social point of view, systems of protection and welfare, already present in many countries in Paul VI's day, are finding it hard and could find it even harder in the future to pursue their goals of true social justice in today's profoundly changed environment. The global market has stimulated first and foremost, on the part of rich countries, a search for areas in which to outsource production at low cost with a view to reducing the prices of many goods, increasing purchasing power and thus accelerating the rate of development in terms of greater availability of consumer goods for the domestic market. Consequently, the market has prompted new forms of competition between States as they seek to attract foreign businesses to set up production centres, by means of a variety of instruments, including favourable fiscal regimes and deregulation of the labour market. These processes have led to a downsizing of social security systems as the price to be paid for seeking greater competitive advantage in the global market, with consequent grave danger for the rights of workers, for fundamental human rights and for the solidarity associated with the traditional forms of the social State. Systems of social security can lose the capacity to carry out their task, both in emerging countries and in those that were among the earliest to develop, as well as in poor countries. Here budgetary policies, with cuts in social spending often made under pressure from international financial institutions, can leave citizens powerless in the face of old and new risks; such powerlessness is increased by the lack of effective protection on the part of workers' associations. Through the combination of social and economic change, trade union organizations experience greater difficulty in carrying out their task of representing the interests of workers, partly because Governments, for reasons of economic utility, often limit the freedom or the negotiating capacity of labour unions. Hence traditional networks of solidarity have more and more obstacles to overcome. The repeated calls issued within the Church's social doctrine, beginning with Rerum Novarum[60], for the promotion of workers' associations that can defend their rights must therefore be honoured today even more than in the past, as a prompt and far-sighted response to the urgent need for new forms of cooperation at the international level, as well as the local level.

There's a lot more along these lines, including the importance of having access to local agriculture, which is interesting in light of what has happened in rural America (prisons, methamphetamine, lower life expectancy, etc. etc.) as a result of conservative policies that have fostered monopolization of food production and distribution.

Pointing this out is not to do justice to the broader philosophical context of the document, but it is there and does need to be pointed out. And no amount of sophistry by the Wall Street Journal editorial board (today's utilizes both the strawman fallacy and false dichotomy to mislead the reader about the content of the encyclical) or the good folks at National Review can change the clear, unambiguous contents of the encyclical.

In this regard, note that what Pope Benedict describes above is exactly what the American South did in instituting "right to work" laws. Note that, contra the Wall Street Journal and National Review, Pope Benedict is neither stupid nor uninformed. When he writes that governments "often limit the freedom or the negotiating capacity of labour unions" THAT'S WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT. Contra the entire thrust of the Republican Party since Reagen, he's criticizing "right to work" laws. The encyclical entails defending, among other things, the Employee Free Choice Act.

I am morally certain that my home state of Louisiana, one of the most Roman Catholic in the country, is not going to revoke its anti-union laws, even though those very laws have led to the outmigration of skilled labor and increase relative wealth inequality and poverty. Even though Pope Benedict says they are inconsistent with Roman Catholic teaching. This being said, Louisiana will spend millions each year losing lawsuits defending unconstitutional laws regarding evolution, school prayer, and abortion that are yearly passed as a sop to supposed Christians.

July 09, 2009

Rollins Band - Do It



Henry Rollins is like Sampson, when his hair is poofy he is one of the most powerful (in the sense of Rocking out) creatures alive.

When it's too short to assume its natural poofiness the spirit of Rock leaves him, and you get inappropriate "jazzy" bass, his natural Iggyesque bouncing around transformed into weird, slow undulations during the performances, shot vocal chords, non-immortal songs, and the self help schtick transforming into a general bullying attitude towards life. This video was from his last greatest poofy-hair period.

Does one need any more proof of the fallenness of our age than the fact that Rollins Band only got popular after he recorded an album with his hair so short as to be denuded of all poof?

July 08, 2009

first thread on Sicart reading group

A thread on the Introduction to Sicart's The Ethics of Computer Games is started HERE.

July 07, 2009

Kant (Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals)

Nor could one given poorer counsel to morality than to attempt to derive it from examples. For each example of morality which is exhibited must itself have been previously judged according to principles of morality to see whether it was worthy to serve as an original example or model. By no means could it authoritatively furnish the concept of morality. Even the Holy One of the Gospel must be compared with our ideal of moral perfection before He is recognized as such; even He says of Himself, "Why call ye Me (Whom you see) good? None is good (the archetype of the good) except God only (Whom you do not see)." But whence do we have the concept of God as the highest good? Solely from the Idea of moral perfection which reason formulates a priori and which it inseparably connects with the concept of a free will.

interesting thread

Urizenus Sklar (aka Peter Ludlow) has started an interesting thread at the Philosophy of Video Games blog HERE.

The movies made by players of the game EVE are really stunning. I need to dig out my Aarseth to try to reacquaint myself with the ludologist's original gripe about narrative. Right now we're reading Miguel Sicart's The Ethics of Computer Games; maybe the next book will have bearing on the ludology/narratology brouhaha.

July 06, 2009

Saint Paul (1 Corinthians 13)

If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing.

Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

trust your mechanic

Tomorrow morning I go to the doctor about something I should had looked into months ago. My right shoulder hurts all the time to varying degrees, and it has less mobility than the other one. I've bought a new desk, learned to use the wiji board on my computer instead of the mouse, taken a couple of bottles of ibuprofen, and tried all sorts of yoga things. Nothing's worked reliably. I hope they can fix this with surgery or physical therapy well before our new kid is born in late December/early January.

My friend Mark has a pretty healthy Cartesian attitude about doctors. Think of them as your allies against your body, which is going to betray you in all sorts of horrifying ways during your brief time on this planet. The good thing about this attitude is that if you can instantiate it, then you don't get too hung up on quaint notions like dignity while they poke and prod at you. The bad thing is that it's not really true, any more than your auto mechanic is your ally. . .

Also, your bodily dignity is not the only thing violated- (1) having to get permission in the other areas of your life to make all the different appointments, (2) having to mess with traffic to get to the various health-industrial complexes, (3) being assaulted by television during the long period in the waiting rooms, (4) being ushered into the examination room and having to wait there for interminable periods of time, (5) losing hope for humanity while surrounded by the downwardly mobile barbarians to whom Reaganist destruction (of small manufacturing on the one hand and unions on the other) has ceded this country (see this book for an explanation of how it worked out in rural America), (6) trying to communicate with an overworked doctor who spends most of his time negotiating with insurance companies and who might be compromised by pharmaceutical company payola, (7) trying to communicate honestly with the doctor when you are always suspect of trying to get the him to violate some bit of the war on drugs. Even if you can forget about the humiliation of removing your clothes and being poked at by a stranger, all of these things dehumanize and infantilize the soul.

My friend Ty tries to view these things as Buddhist meditations of some sort. The good thing about this is that it works. The bad thing is that it only really works if you've spent years in a monastery. I wish I had.

Back in Baton Rouge

6371_102158703005_679138005_2091277_8232222_n Here's Thomas pondering the nature of self-reflection in Florida. Today he's getting reacquainted with all of his toys in Baton Rouge.

I brought a bunch of work with me (some of it actually on self-reflection) but just ended up reading Brian Ruckley's two fantasy/adventure novels and hanging out with family instead. It was nice.

Willie Nelson - Me and Paul

June 26, 2009

blog hiatus

I'm going to be in Florida visiting my folks and sister's family from tomorrow until July 5th. Since my parents don't have the interwebs in their condo, blogging will be non-existent during that time.

Please avail yourselves of the Braver on-line reading group and contribute to the discussion. My post on Braver's chapter on Hegel will be up this Monday.

I don't know how big a lie it would be to say that I am looking forward to flying tomorrow. Please read this earlier insightful post.

June 25, 2009

Leonard Cohen - Avalanche (for Michael Jackson)

navel gazing

I've been out of grad school for a decade now (some of that time as contingent labor). I've gotten fifteen articles and a book published in that time. I've reviewed articles for some pretty good journals and books for pretty good presses. I'm a good proofreader for my friend's papers

I'm nowhere approaching a "star," but on the other hand I've nothing to be ashamed of.

With the new child, gall bladder disease (before bowing down to reality and finally getting the thing removed, my diet was as superstitiously weird as Nietzsche's in his crazy Ecce Homo period), and writing the book with Mark on a short deadline, I let the whole paper thing completely slide for over a year.

Now that I'm pulling myself up by my own hair (publishing is just like that) to get back into the game, I've noticed something really strange: my rate of rejections on articles is exactly the same as when I just got out of graduate school. I would think I would be better at this by now and so have a higher acceptance rate. But no, I have to spend just as much time rewriting papers to take into account criticisms from the journal they got rejected from. I have to spend just as much time reformatting the papers to fit the different journals' idiosyncratic style guidelines. I hope I'm not being intolerably precious by finding this frustrating.

From my acceptance rates I have to conclude that I'm sending out the same level of crap I was sending out before I knew anything about how journal publishing worked.

Probably I should just count myself lucky if the crap level does not go way up.

Daniel Dennett says academics are like sea squirts, who move around for the first part of their lives finding a good rock to attach themselves to. Once they attach to a rock, they no longer need their brain and they promptly digest their own brain (they really do this). For an academic, getting tenure (if you are lucky enough in the million ways involved right now to get a tenure track job in the first place) is the equivalent to the sea squirt finding its rock. 

Maybe the lack of terror about not getting tenure balances out the increased knowledge of philosophy and how the process works? On this theory there is just a certain balance of ineptitude that is maintained before and after tenure. That's better than the sea squirt hypothesis.

3d update of list of crap to accomplish this summer

I'm going to keep reposting this as I get things done.

  1. Proofread chapters of a friend's book [finished on 5/14/09].
  2. Review an article for Australasian [finished on 5/24/09].
  3. With Jason Megill, resubmit paper on Church's Thesis [finished on 6/1/09].
  4. Write a sample article for a proposed Dungeons & Dragons and Philosophy book (on the alignment system) [finished and sent to Mark on 6/21/09]
  5. With Mark Silcox, craft draft of a proposal for D & D and Philosophy book [finished and sent to Mark on 6/21/09].
  6. With Mark Silcox, rewrite and resubmit (to new journal) paper on ontological versus epistemic emergence. [finished on 6/25/09]
  7. Inaugurate local pragmatics/semantics/philosophy of language reading group with close study of Kadmon's Formal Pragmatics [started weekly meetings on 6/3/09].
  8. Help run an on-line reading group on Lee Braver's A Thing of this World over at Perverse Egalitarianism [started on 6/15/09].
  9. Do a vastly more casual reading group on Michael Sicart's The Ethics of Computer Games at our Philosophy Through Video Games blog. [started on 6/26/09 (actual posting starts second week of July)]
  10. With Jeff Roland write a paper on epistemic modality and informative conditionals (submit a truncated version to the Alabama Philosophical Society Conference). [I'm insanely hoping to get this done by July 15th; if we're right the paper should write itself.]
  11. (Possibly with Salvatore Florio) write a paper on applying Williamson's thoughts on Fitch's Proof to Mavrodes' solution to the paradox of the stone (and submit a version to some other conference). Thinking over this will give me a chance to read Graham Priest's Beyond the Limit's of Thought and Jonathon Kvanvig's book on Fitch's paradox much more closely than I have [If I can get 8 done by July 15th I can get a draft to Sal by August 24th].

It's optimistic to think I'll get all that done by the end of summer. Even more optimistic but as far as writing in Fall and Spring I'd like to get some subset of the following done in probably this order.

  1. Use the study group to write a book review of Lee Braver's A Thing of this World.
  2. Resubmit with Mark Silcox a paper on Searle's APA presidential address about computation.
  3. With Jeff Roland write a paper on Putnam's model theoretic argument (taking into account Stich's Deconstructing the Mind and Lewis' 1984 Australasian piece).
  4. Write a paper using Okrent's new book on animal cognition to contrast the early Heidegger and Brandom's account of content (some earlier posts showed how this will go, this will also give me a chance to read Okrent's first Heidegger book and Mark Lance and Beka Kukla's pragmatics book).
  5. Write another paper on Fitch's paradox, but this one about it in the context of the Fichte/Schopenhauer argument against Kant.
  6. With Frankie Worrell, write a paper on Schopenhauer's views about vagueness.
  7. Write a paper about the scheme/content distinction in religious epistemology.
  8. Write something on idea of non-revisionary dialetheism (via perverse account of consequence, maybe applying to Priest's inconsistent arithmetic as a test case; would also be a chance to really digest Hartry Field's new book).

Those will certainly bleed into next summer. The trick is to keep getting things back out when they get rejected. If the rewrites take too much time then everything else will be slowed down. But that's just the way it is.

Spring of 2010 I'll teach a class on Soames' history of analytic philosophy (Volume I and Volume II). Fall of 2010 I'll do one on Lee Braver, Graham Priest, and Quentin Meillassoux. In Spring of 2011 I'll teach one on John McDowell (using the material from the previous class to critique analytic neo-Hegelianism), and in Spring of 2011 I'll teach one on Speculative Realism (as an alternative to neo-Hegelianism). Hopefully from notes for those classes I'll get some ms towards another book. I have lots of ideas for after the D & D anthology (e.g. on: (1) paradoxes of totality and speculative realism, (2) against neo-Kantian religious epistemologies, (3) for a Harmanesque Heideggerian philosophy of language, and (4) a Harmanesque take on Schopenhauer), but I'll just see what happens. For the next year and a have to focus on getting back into the paper game. It's pretty gruelling, but I want to have enough papers in decent places for full professor and let the books be lagniappe.

From Mark Bauerlein's Chronicle of Higher Education Blog

Here from Common Core is another report that has an interesting finding. It compares the curricula of some high-performing nations around the world to those of the United States and concludes, “Each of the nations that consistently outrank the United States on the PISA exam provides their students with a comprehensive, content-rich education in the liberal arts and sciences.” The report finds that arts and humanities requirements in school are common to nation’s whose students perform well on tests. Those countries share, says Lynne Munson (quoted by Education Week), “a dedication to educating their children deeply in a wide range of subjects.” The narrow focus on math and reading skills, Common Core infers, actually hinder the students’ performance on math and reading tests.

This makes sense. When I was growing up in Alabama the politicians who always reformed education by making it about what they always called the "three R's" (reading, writing, and arithmetic) were in fact as stupid as you would infer if you didn't realize the phrase was a joke.

This kind of politician does not write well nor does he read books (beyond the twenty or so he had to to get his college degree), and with the exception of a few engineering types, has no knowledge of higher math. But I guess if you really thought the highest goal of education is to produce a cadre of self-satisfied, a-literate, ignorant people like yourself, it was a rational plan.

June 24, 2009

Leonard Cohen - The Stranger Song