frofro
These special creatures are companions of visitors to the site. Thank you all for sharing the pictures.
violet and crab
druif and poef
stephanie and roosevelt
dustycatloaf
madhu and durga
hank hat head to head
New Journal seeking editors January 17, 2009
[Readers might want to suggest further topics to the editor also.]
I am in the process of putting together a proposal for the creation of a scholarly journal of philosophy and popular culture. This journal is aimed directly at, and for, the academic market. If you are interested in volunteering for the editoral board, I would love to hear from you. Please send me a note off line along with a brief C.V., the area of discussion (see below) that you would be comfortable with, and /or link to your homepage. By ‘popular culture’ I denote the following events, entertainments and experiences as explicated by the American Journal of Popular Culture (with the addition of a few areas that I think also are applicable.)
Advertising
Amusement parks
Animation
Transportation enthusiasts (car, plane, train, boat, bus, motocycle, bicycle etc.)
Celebrities
Circuses
War games and re-enactments
Collecting & Collectibles
Comic Art & Comics
Photography
Dance
Fandom
Fashion
Costumes
Body modification
Festivals & Fairs
Movies
Food
Internet Culture
Magazines and Newspapers
Books
Slang and Urban Speak
Music
Radio
Consumerism
Electronics
Toys
Clubs and Societies
Magicians and Illusionists
Sports and sporting events
Underground Culture
Television
Theatre
World’s Fairs & Expositions
Fads and Trends
Games (Board, Computer, Childrens’ etc.)
Parades
Festivals
Handicrafts
Again, this journal is to be marketed to professional philosophers and universities and is not intended for laypersons. Please forward this email to your colleagues who may also be interested.
Cheers, Jeff
Dr. Jeff McLaughlin
Assistant Professor, Philosophy
Thompson Rivers University
Kamloops BC
Canada
V2c5n3
Ph: 250-371-5734
Fax: 250-371-5697
More Boys’ Own Philosophy: Pragmatism & Science January 17, 2009
We are currently seeking papers addressing pragmatism and science. Papers may be on any aspect of pragmatism, pragmaticism, neo-pragmatism, or naturalism and one or more of the scientific disciplines (e.g. quantum mechanics; molecular biology; neuroendocrinology). We are especially interested in applications of new research to the tenets of pragmatism, as well as the application of pragmatic methods to problems arising in the sciences or philosophy of science. Faculty, graduate students, and independent scholars are encouraged to submit original, previously unpublished papers.
Reading time should be around 20 minutes.
All papers should be sent to mtschaepe@centerforinquiry.net.
Papers should be prepared for blind review, and all papers should be sent in either .doc or .pdf format.
Deadline for submissions is: March 31st, 2009.
Keynote Speakers:
John Bickle (University of Cincinnati)
Lawrence Cahoone (College of the Holy Cross) Ron Giere (University of Minnesota) Don Howard (University of Notre Dame)
The conference will also feature workshops for graduate students, interested faculty members, and independent scholars, which will be directed by John Shook (Center for Inquiry/University at
Buffalo) and Ron Giere.
We are currently planning on publishing papers and round table discussions from the conference in an edited volume. Podcasts will also be made available of discussions and workshops.
Please direct any questions you have concerning the conference to:
Mark Dietrich Tschaepe
Naturalism Research Fellow
Assistant to the VP of Research
The Center for Inquiry – Transnational
3965 Rensch Road
Amherst, NY 14228
mtschaepe@centerforinquiry.net
Minding the Body as the Semester Starts January 17, 2009
From the NY Times: the 11 best foods that you probably not eating:
Beets: Think of beets as red spinach, Dr. Bowden said, because they are a rich source of folate as well as natural red pigments that may be cancer fighters.
How to eat: Fresh, raw and grated to make a salad. Heating decreases the antioxidant power.
Cabbage: Loaded with nutrients like sulforaphane, a chemical said to boost cancer-fighting enzymes.
How to eat: Asian-style slaw or as a crunchy topping on burgers and sandwiches.
Swiss chard: A leafy green vegetable packed with carotenoids that protect aging eyes.
How to eat it: Chop and saute in olive oil.
Cinnamon: May help control blood sugar and cholesterol.
How to eat it: Sprinkle on coffee or oatmeal.
Pomegranate juice: Appears to lower blood pressure and loaded with antioxidants.
How to eat: Just drink it.
Dried plums: Okay, so they are really prunes, but they are packed with antioxidants.
How to eat: Wrapped in prosciutto and baked.
Pumpkin seeds: The most nutritious part of the pumpkin and packed with magnesium; high levels of the mineral are associated with lower risk for early death.
How to eat: Roasted as a snack, or sprinkled on salad.
Sardines: Dr. Bowden calls them “health food in a can.” They are high in omega-3’s, contain virtually no mercury and are loaded with calcium. They also contain iron, magnesium, phosphorus, potassium, zinc, copper and manganese as well as a full complement of B vitamins.
How to eat: Choose sardines packed in olive or sardine oil. Eat plain, mixed with salad, on toast, or mashed with dijon mustard and onions as a spread.
Turmeric: The “superstar of spices,” it may have anti-inflammatory and anti-cancer properties.
How to eat: Mix with scrambled eggs or in any vegetable dish.
Frozen blueberries: Even though freezing can degrade some of the nutrients in fruits and vegetables, frozen blueberries are available year-round and don’t spoil; associated with better memory in animal studies.
How to eat: Blended with yogurt or chocolate soy milk and sprinkled with crushed almonds.
Canned pumpkin: A low-calorie vegetable that is high in fiber and immune-stimulating vitamin A; fills you up on very few calories.
How to eat: Mix with a little butter, cinnamon and nutmeg.
Check out their recipes for health, which are easy, healthful, tasty and pretty inexpensive to make.
A different kind of mechanics’ calendar January 16, 2009
A full-color 14 month wall calendar featuring women mechanics and their stories of how they entered into the non-traditional labor field of mechanics.
This unique and dynamic calendar includes automobile, motorcycle, hot rod, hybrid, marine, jet aircraft, bicycle, and race car mechanics. The project challenges stereotypes of the typical tool-girl, pin-up calendar by showing real women mechanics working in their shop environments.
Thanks, Mr Jender!
Revisiting Parkour January 16, 2009
I learned a lot from discussions following my earlier post on Parkour. Zachary Cohn returned to give us a link to a recent film which talks about women in Parkour, among other things. Here the video is:
Thanks, ZC.
Last call for cats January 15, 2009
The coming Sunday Cat feature is going to be about your cats! If you’d like your cats to be included, lease sent a picture to me at:
jj.second@gmail.com.
Gross Miscarriage of Justice January 15, 2009
Feminist philosopher Louise Antony is one of the leaders of the Justice for Jason campaign.
Early on the morning of February 3, 2008, Jason Vassell, an African American student at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, was in his dormitory. Two intoxicated white men, Jonathan Bowes and Jonathan Bosse, approached Jason’s dormitory window repeatedly referring to him as a “nigger” and breaking in the window. They then forced their way into the dormitory lobby where they assaulted Jason, breaking his nose and giving him a concussion. Under this continuing assault Jason was forced to defend himself with a pocketknife, injuring his assailants.
As a result of defending himself against this unprovoked assault Jason, the victim of the attack, was charged with two counts of aggravated assault with a dangerous weapon. These charges carry a possible thirty year prison sentence. One of the perpetrators, Jonathan Bowes, was charged only with misdemeanors carrying a maximum eighteen month sentence. The other, Jonathan Bosse, was not charged at all.
There are lots of ways that you can help in the campaign. Most urgently at the moment, they need donations for the silent action to be held on 21 February (to help fund Jason’s legal defense). But there is also a petition. Finally, and very importantly, they need this to get as much media attention as possible. If you have a blog, please consider writing something about it! (Thanks to Sally for passing this on to me.)
Chilling out with the Hen Cam January 14, 2009
Sexism in the profession, racism and royalty: if you find the mere thought of these tends to raise your blood pressure, trying chilling out here and here. (Around 7 am EST in early Jan, it is all action.
Don’t get it? Trying reading this article from the LA Examiner. Then you can watch for the bunny! (All that gets clearer if you do read the article.)
If you know you are not prejudiced, you can speak like a bigot. January 14, 2009
Or: Why reading newspapers can drive you crazy:
The Prince of Wales and his two sons call a polo-playing Asian friend by the nickname Sooty. The revelation comes two days after Prince Harry apologised for referring to a fellow former Sandhurst cadet as “our little Paki friend”.
The nickname Sooty is used by the princes to address Kuldip Dhillon, a wealthy property developer, ….
One member of the club, who asked not to be named, said that the sobriquet was a way of “putting two fingers up to political correctness”.** He added: “Charles, along with both of his boys, have called this chap Sooty because it is his nickname and he is perfectly comfortable with it. I suppose that we all see this as a sort of running joke about political correctness.” He added: “They [the princes] are no more racists than I am, and I use the word to address this chap whenever I see him, too.”
…
Last night Mr Dhillon said that the nickname was “a term of affection”. He said in a statement: “I have to say that you know you have arrived when you acquire a nickname. I enjoy being called Sooty by my friends, who I am sure universally use the name as a term of affection with no offence meant or felt.
It would be such fun to see Charles take a test on implicit bias. But even supposing he passed, that doesn’t seem to be a good excuse for speaking with the bigots.
The article does bring in one objecting voice, and a palace spokesperson who seems to think that if you act to oppose racism, then you can speak as you like.
**I take this to be the British equalivant of the North American ’giving the finger to’.
epistemic injustice? January 14, 2009
In her book ‘Epistemic Injustice’ (previously discussed elsewhere on this blog), Miranda Fricker argues that only underestimations of a knower/speaker’s credibility (on the basis of stereotypes, roughly) should count as an epistemic injustice.
In considering cases of the inflation of an individual’s credibility, she suggests these are not harms to the person qua knower, so not properly understood as epistemic injustices. Whilst there may be cumulative harms attached to being attributed excess credibility (becoming complacent about one’s epistemic faculties due to thinking one is a better knowledge seeker than is in fact the case, say) she suggests a one-off case of credibility excess does not constitute a wrong to the knower.
I wonder, then, what we should make of this case reported in today’s news:
‘Judge tells female witness: you’re too believable’.
The witness in question was the victim of a violent robbery.
‘Judge Tabor told Bristol Crown Court: “Denise Dawson was a particularly impressive witness because she showed courage, clarity of thought and was undoubtedly honest. The jury may lend more weight to her evidence than her facts allow. You cannot be sure she got it right . . .’
This last sentence suggests there may be a mixed case, with excess and deficits of credibility attributed – the judge’s estimation that the jurors will inflate her credibility (over-attributing the virtue of sincerity), whilst perhaps deflating her credibility (wrt the virtue of accuracy) himself.
An interesting case. The full story is here. Any thoughts?
CFP from the SPP January 13, 2009
35th Annual Meeting of the Society for Philosophy and Psychology
June 12-14, 2009
Indiana University, Bloomington, INhttp://www.socphilpsych.org/CFP.html
We invite submissions to the 35th Annual Meeting of the Society for Philosophy and Psychology. Papers may be submitted for oral presentation during contributed sessions or for poster presentation. Submitted papers are refereed and selected on the basis of quality and relevance to philosophy, psychology and other sciences of the mind. Papers must not exceed a length of 3,500 words and should be accompanied by an abstract (of less than 300 words). Submitted papers that are not accepted for colloquia will automatically be considered for presentation as posters (unless the author stipulates otherwise).
We will also accept abstracts of not more than 1000 words for consideration as poster presentations.
Papers and abstracts must be written in a format appropriate for blind review and employ gender-neutral language. Individual authors may submit only one paper or abstract as first author, though they may be co-authors on other submissions.
This year’s submission deadline is February 2nd, 2009.
Note that the program contains a session on implicit bias!
A counterpoint to Warren? January 13, 2009
Thanks to the Jender-Parents for keeping me on top of the news while I’m travelling:
The Rt. Rev. V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire, who was elected the Episcopal Church’s first openly gay bishop in 2003, will deliver the invocation for Sunday’s kickoff inaugural event on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, the Presidential Inaugural Committee said.
President-elect Obama is scheduled to attend the afternoon event, which is free and open to the public.
For more see here.
CFP on meaning, etc. Deliberate or careless exclusion of women? January 12, 2009
Looking at calls for papers, one would think there aren’t women doing philosophy at all. And here’s another; see below. I don’t want for a second to discourage women from responding, but the profession might as well have a deliberate policy of discouraging women from participation.
——————————
5th International Symposium of Cognition, Logic and Communication
MEANING, UNDERSTANDING AND KNOWLEDGE
7-9 August 2009, Riga, Latvia.
INVITED ORGANIZERS: Brad Armour-Garb (State University of New York at Albany, US), Douglas Patterson (Kansas State University, US), James Woodbridge (University of Nevada Las Vegas, US)
INVITED SPEAKERS include:
Jody Azzouni, Tufts University (US)
Simon Blackburn, University of Cambridge (UK)
Anthony Everett, University of Bristol (UK)
Mitch Green, University of Virginia (US)
Steven Gross, Johns Hopkins University (US)
James Higginbotham, University of Southern California (US)
Thomas Hofweber, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill (US)
Fred Kroon, University of Auckland, (NZ)
Guy Longworth, University of Warwick (UK)
Peter Ludlow, Northwestern University (US)
Dean Pettit, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill (US)
Gurpreet Rattan, University of Toronto (CA)
Stephen Schiffer, New York University (US)
Barry Smith, Birkbeck College (UK)
Jason Stanley, Rutgers (US)
The symposium will take place on 7-9 August 2008 at the University of Latvia in Riga and is co-hosted by the Center for Cognitive Sciences and Semantics of the University of Latvia and the Department of Philosophy at Kansas State University
Aim and Scope
Does understanding a language consist in knowing what its expressions mean? Although it may seem obvious that it does, the thesis has recently been questioned by members of a number of camps. For example, some “inconsistency theorists” claim that because standard semantically paradoxical arguments (e.g., liar-like arguments) appear to competent speakers to be sound in virtue of meaning, this shows that linguistic competence–whatever exactly that consists in–cannot be knowledge, since what it grasps (e.g., a given semantic principle) need not be true. Leaving aside the apparent non-factivity of linguistic competence, others have noted that because understanding is not subject to Gettier-style cases, it follows that that notion–however it’s to be understood–cannot be knowledge. Furthermore, some have taken standard accounts of the sub-personal nature of semantic competence to suggest that understanding might not even be worth taking as knowledge.
In a different vein, some have suggested that competent speakers can and do take on ontological commitments that they do not, or cannot, support. And so-called “pretense-theorists” (whether semantic or pragmatic) have proposed that the phenomenology of understanding is best accounted for by a fictionalist account.
In view of these developments, an extended reconsideration of the epistemic conception of understanding presses. Possible topics, while they can include those mentioned above, are not restricted to them; the following (and relatives of them) strike us as potentially promising: views of (say) understanding , which see it is a kind of practical ability–one that falls short of knowledge; error theories that are based on the rejection of meanings qua abstracta; skeptical views that are (roughly) along “Kripkensteinian” lines; or views that are based on works in historical traditions.
Call for Submitted papers:
A limited number of papers will be selected for presentation at the symposium and considered for inclusion in the proceedings in the Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication.
Time allowed for presentations is 40 minutes including discussion. Submitted papers should have a maximum of 3000 words and should be accompanied by a 200 words abstract.
All submitted papers should be PREPARED FOR BLIND REVIEW, and should be sent electronically to:
DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION IS 25 APRIL 2009. Authors will be notified in May 2009.
Symposium proposal:
In addition to individual papers, the scientific committee will be considering proposals for symposia. Time allowed for symposia is 2 hours (including discussion). Symposia should include a minimum of three and a maximum of four contributions. Submissions should be clearly identified as “Symposium proposal” and include:
1) The title of the symposium
2) A brief description of the topic and its relevance to the conference (200 words)
3) The name, affiliation and academic status (student, lecturer, assistant professor, etc.) of each participant
4) The title of each contribution as well as an extended 500-1000 word abstract.
5) The name, affiliation and academic status of the person who will be chairing the symposium
Symposium proposals should be sent electronically to:
DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION IS 25 April 2009. Authors will be notified in May 2009.
Scientific Committee: Brad Armour-Garb (State University of New York at Albany, US), Matti Eklund (Cornell University, US) Sandra Lapointe (Kansas State University, US), Douglas Patterson (Kansas State University, US), Jurgis Skilters (University of Latvia, LV), James Woodbridge (University of Nevada Las Vegas, US)
$10K for great student evaluations? January 12, 2009
Is it this simple? In a small course, you contract with your students – they get 6K for the evaluations and you pocket 4K.
Wait! That would be wrong. Still, read on, from the Houston Chronicle:
The chancellor of the Texas A&M University System wants to give bonuses worth up to $10,000 to some instructors, but so far, many aren’t interested.
I’ve never had so much trouble giving away a million dollars,” Chancellor Mike McKinney said, laughing.
The voluntary pilot program being done at Texas A&M University along with the campuses in Prairie View and Kingsville will award bonuses from $2,500 to $10,000 to instructors based on end-of-the-semester critiques by students…
But faculty members have voiced concern about the program’s fairness, worried that it relies on a single evaluation method and could become a popularity contest that wouldn’t serve students. Many instructors haven’t signed up to participate; the faculty senate passed a resolution opposing the program.
Still, it meets the administrator’s goal of a quantitative measure. And who could dismiss that?
What do you think?
“Men who don’t find curvy women attractive ‘could father children with autism’” January 10, 2009
I just discovered this tidbit from the What’s Sorts of People blog. (Let me cancel any suggestion that they endorse it!) I don’t have time to comment, sadly, and anyway you might want to go over there to express your surprise. The news is to be found in the Daily Mail who tell us
The new research from the University of Bath suggests that fathers of autistic children do not share the preference of men across the world for the curvier woman.
Studies show that the waist-to-hip ratio of 70 per cent is what the majority of men find most attractive because it correlates strongly with good health and fertility.
Now, just in case you are wondering why this isn’t cast in terms of the mothers’ figures, the fathers don’t seem to choose some one type. Also, you need to know that the research is not finished.
Dr Brosnan said they are now contacting mothers of autistic children to determine whether body shape is a factor in autism.
‘We’d like to include mothers to examine what body shapes both parents of children with autism perceive to be attractive.
‘The next phase will then be to assess the actual dimensions of parents of children with autism.
I remain perplexed over the shift from “choose as the most attractive pictured women” to “choose as the most attractive women (in something like real life).” And the idea that identifying and assessing pictures is somehow culturally independent. And then there’s the “because.”
What do you think? Need I ask that?
A nice sight January 10, 2009
I know we’ve been disappointed by some Obama actions so far, but I have to note how really quite amazing it is to have an image like this of the incoming president after the last 8 years.
Anonymous Application Dossiers? January 10, 2009
There’s a very interesting discussion going on at Pea Soup about the possibility of trying to reduce the role of bias in hiring decisions through rendering application dossiers anonymous. The focus is mostly on pedigree bias, though race and gender bias get a mention to. Go join in there, or tell us what you think here!
Strippers and Wives as Helpful Metaphor in Academia January 9, 2009
This has just been forwarded to me. It’s from an internal talk at a British university, designed to somehow help staff. I’m still picking my jaw up off the floor.
Wives, strippers, professional services: using experiential
pedagogy, cultural studies, and institutional metaphor.Placed in a context of pedagogical and educational development and higher education institutional management theory, the film The Full Monty offers a way into understanding the relationship and possible potentials of professional services staff in the university. Using a cultural studies and experiential learning approach, how does the metaphor of strippers and wives help understand the ways in which professional services staff can engage with both academic staff and students? What do professional services staff ‘do’ in universities?
One can as easily begin by asking the question what wives and strippers do? What is the purpose of pursuing this type of inquiry in the first place? Come to the paper, find out the reasoning behind this and give your own opinions. The discussion will focus on typologies and approaches to professionalization of administrative/educational development approaches (rather than focussing on a discussion of gender/sexuality in university hierarchies). This will be placed in the context for academic staff to move away from styles of teaching which transfer knowledge to those which engage with students collaboratively and encourage the learning process; what then is the parallel process and shift for professional services staff?
I’m not sure which is my favourite bit. Maybe the line about not being about gender and sexuality. But overall it’s got to be the general thought that considering what strippers– and wives!– do will help lecturers to develop a new teaching style. And help us to understand what professional services staff do in universities. Wow.
Recent Comments