In asking and attempting to answer the question, “What is a philosopher?” in “The Stone,” (discussed by us here), Simon Critchley arguably articulates a familiar image of the philosopher. To put it roughly, he thinks that philosopher is an other worldly creature who is not engaged with the common values and mores of the society.
This is not an uncommon description, and it may be one philosophers generally think is true of them. So let’s suppose it is part of philosophy’s self-image, and restrict our attention to those doing philosophy in Western universities today.
Philosophy professors seem to be on the whole very privileged and elitist practitioners. For people who do not hold to society’s values, they conform to lots of them and benefit from them. Thus there seems to be a suspicious gap between the self-image and the reality.
Or let’s suppose that’s all true for the sake of argument. What I’m interested in is why this is or could be a feminist concern. And, while we’re at it, maybe we should say what does or can make something a feminist concern. (Or not, since that’s a lot to ask of a comment here.)
What do you think?