This is very odd, and, one hopes, it is simply the product of just bad writing: NEH summer stipends may not be used for “projects that seek to promote a particular political, philosophical, religious, or ideological point of view.” Won’t this prevent most philosophers from applying, unless they’re writing a survey piece? One assumes that, given the list, by “philosophical” they mean something closer to “political” and “ideological,” and not someone proposing to defend four-dimensionalism or compatibilism or epistemic internalism …
I thought BL must be right until I remembered a comment on one of our recent posts. SeanH quoted Leiter quoting Nietzsche:
“[Philosophers] all pose as if they had discovered and reached their real opinions through the self-development of a cold, pure, divinely unconcerned dialectic…; while at bottom it is an assumption, a hunch, indeed, a kind of ‘intuition’…that they defend with reasons they have sought after the fact. They are all advocates [Advoktaen] who resent that name, and for the most part even wily spokesmen for their prejudice which they baptize ‘truths’–and very far from having the courge of the conscience that admits this, precisely this, to itself…”
Is, then, all philosophy ideology? Or at least as practiced today? Is the NEH just taking Nietzsche very seriously?
(Since the net is infamous for failure in communication, perhaps I should note this post is something of a joke. But not entirely. For example, Cartesian assumptions about what isolated philosophical reflection can discover seem still alive and well. I myself regard much of philosophy of mind as the product of woefully unexamined dogma, though the details of this are not necessarily germaine. Do readers have other examples of the ideology present in today’s philosophy? Maybe with a little more detail than I have given so far?)