SelfHatingPhilosopher

"No taxation without representation-in-Rawl's-original-position"

"You know that signed book I sent you? Yeah, The Metaphysics of Being and Nothingness... I'm going to need that back."

Premise 1: Early humans practiced incest because of Adam and Eve were the only humans there were. But then as they peopled the Earth, the practice of incest stopped. Premise 2: Early philosophers often committed academic incest from the BA to the PhD. But now that the field has grown, the practice has stopped. Conclusion: Check-mate, atheists.

So, now that Valentine's Day has come and gone, what did you guys get for your adcom? After speaking with some of my advisors who in the past were students of Brandom, my POI at Pittsburgh, I decided to get him a lavender-smelling beard comb. I forgot to do this last time I applied, so I have high hopes for this second application season.

I'd actually say it's the only meaningful overlap. Analytic philosophy is a science and deals with a narrow, technical focus. I could iterate through countless of other deabtes, and the result would be the same. Marx, Habermas, Derrida, Deleuze, Foucault, Adorno... none of them have anything to say that will be useful beyond a very trivial sense because it's not grounded in anything nor is it technically developed. I 've read a good bit of continental because I used to specialize in it. I've probably read more Hegel, Marx, Adorno, Sartre, and commentators than I have analytic philosophy; and yet, it's all been useless in any sort of metaphysics or political philosophy work that I've done thus far.

Really? I'm curious then. If I'm doing phil science, and I'm wondering about resultant and component forces, and I'm reading Creary, Cartwright, and Wilson, I'm wondering what continental philosophy has to offer. If I'm doing meta-ethics, and I'm trying to provide a formal semantics for expressivism in light of Being For, I'm wondering what continental philosophy has to offer. If I'm doing metaphysics, and I'm trying to defend Boolos' account of plural quantification in second-order logic, I'm wondering what continental philosophy has to offer. If I'm doing political philosophy, and I'm trying to give an argument against Cohen's account of societal development as a functional argument revolving around a society's productive relations, I'm wondering what continental philosophy has to offer. Because obviously they've made no actual contribution to these problems, but I also don't see how they ever could, or how anything they've said thus far could be relevant.

Also your examples of paragons of rigor makes clear to me that we mean different things by the word "rigor"

I'm a party-line partisan analytic. I don't see any meaning in the distinction, but only because I don't find any overlap between continental and analytic philosophy and just treat continental as a different discipline like English or Anthropology.

That's what one gets for having WRONG opinions on stuff. </s>

I think we need to engage in fistycuffs, because I think Kierkegaard's contribution and importance is nonexistent, but I think his content, and particularly his form weepingly beautiful.

Completly serious. There's many more persons I could include too, to be even more controversial.

You should often be able to get their email online, either on academia.edu by searching for their name or the philosophy department's website under their grad student directory. That said, it is otherwise perfectly fine to request the email information of the female grad students, though I don't know if necessarily you should email the chair. You might be able to go through the secretary who would in any case be the person in charge of maintaining the grad student directory with names and contact information. This is perfectly fine, but even more so given the three horrifying incidents that have occured within one year's time. And I can't imagine a better source of information on how the climate at a department is.

I took a 19th century course and a continental course. Read Nietzsche, Fichte, Heidegger, and others... waste of my time.

http://dailynorthwestern.com/2014/02/12/campus/day-after-lawsuit-ludlows-role-at-northwestern-unclear-moving-forward/ Rutger's is examining the situation.

It doesn't seem right to weigh the two testimonies equally in this situation. You're mischaractizing the situation. First of all, a charge of sexual assault is pretty substantial in and of itself. Yes, there have been cases of false accusations in the past, but by and large such charges tend to turn to be true. Thus, the simple fact a student has brought forwrard this charge should make departments wary of hiring such a person. But the story doesn't end there. Let's look at the other facts. (2) The accuser tried to commit suicide. (3) The accuser was diagnoed with PTSD be a medical practioner. (4) An indepedent investigation found that wrongdoing had been committed. There's probably a lot of importants that need to be unpacked from (4), because I'm assuming the investigation just didn't hear the two different testimonies and release a judgment: "WE FLIPPED A COIN AND WENT WITH THEIR TESTIMONEY OVER THE OTHER." They did an investigation. They interviewed other students, other professors, and did other things. So yeah. Innocent until proven guilty. But if I'm chair of a department, and some guy who wants to be responsible for the philosophical growth and education of my undergraduates comes in with a record like the above... I will not be at all comfortable. And yet, oddly enough, I went through two departments without any of my professors managing to draw up a sexual assault charge even though some of them have been teaching for decades...