The Girls Who Cry Wolf

November 29, 2016 Federal Philosopher 7

Here is a sober article on the discrimination hypothesis against women in philosophy. The authors identify six lines of argument for the hypothesis, and in each case find that proponents of the discrimination hypothesis, who include distinguished philosophers in fields such as philosophy of science, metaphysics, and philosophy of language, have tended to present evidence selectively. Occasionally they have even presented as evidence what appears to be something more dubious—for example, studies supporting the discrimination [Continue reading]

The Recount Dilemma

November 29, 2016 Walter Montgomery 4

In one of the least surprising turn of events since Donald Trump won the presidential election, leftists are demanding recounts in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania. The irony of such requests is probably not lost on our readers, but let’s highlight it anyway. The people calling for recounts are the same people who object to voter ID laws, due in part to the supposed incredibly low rate of voter fraud. Why do we need a recount [Continue reading]

Election Reflection VI: Daniel von Wachter

November 27, 2016 Natural Lawyer 15

Today’s post by Daniel von Wachter (International Academy of Philosophy, Liechtenstein) is the sixth and final post in a series featuring invited reflections on the recent election from right-of-center philosophers. These philosophers are otherwise not associated with Rightly Considered and should not be assumed to hold views expressed by anyone else on this blog. van Wachter is Professor and Director of the International Academy of Philosophy in Liechtenstein. He earned a PhD in philosophy from the University of Hamburg and a DPhil [Continue reading]

Election Reflection V: Philippe Lemoine

November 26, 2016 Natural Lawyer 8

Today’s post by Philippe Lemoine (Cornell University) is the fifth post of a six-part series, each featuring invited reflections from a number of right-of-center philosophers. These philosophers are otherwise not associated with Rightly Considered and should not be assumed to hold views expressed by anyone else on this blog. Philippe Lemoine is a PhD student in Philosophy at Cornell University, where he specializes in the Philosophy of Science. I was already planning to write a Facebook [Continue reading]

Election Reflection IV: Harold Fine

November 23, 2016 Natural Lawyer 6

Today’s post by Harold Fine is the fourth of a six-part series, each featuring invited reflections from a number of right-of-center philosophers. These philosophers are otherwise not associated with Rightly Considered and should not be assumed to hold views expressed by anyone else on this blog. Fine is a professor at a research university somewhere in the United States who, after some reflection (about the possible consequences from close-minded leftists) chose to write under a pen name. [Continue reading]

Election Reflection III: Spencer Case

November 22, 2016 Natural Lawyer 17

Today’s post by Spencer Case (University of Colorado, Boulder) is the third of a six-part series, each featuring invited reflections from a number of right-of-center philosophers. These philosophers are otherwise not associated with Rightly Considered and should not be assumed to hold views expressed by anyone else on this blog. Case is a veteran of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a 2012-13 Fulbright grant recipient to Egypt, and a former Publius Fellow at the Claremont Institute. He writes [Continue reading]

Election Reflection II: John Kekes

November 21, 2016 Natural Lawyer 2

Today’s post by John Kekes (Emeritus, University at Albany) is the second of a six-part series, each featuring invited reflections from a number of right-of-center philosophers. These philosophers are otherwise not associated with Rightly Considered and should not be assumed to hold views expressed by anyone else on this blog. Kekes earned his PhD from the Australian National University and is the author of numerous articles and books, including Against Liberalism, A Case for Conservatism, and The Illusions [Continue reading]

Election Reflection I: William F. Vallicella

November 20, 2016 Natural Lawyer 23

Now that there has been time for cooler-headed reflection, we reached out to a handful of right-of-center philosophers for comment on the recent election. Today launches a six-part series, each featuring one of these philosophers’ reflections. These philosophers are otherwise not associated with Rightly Considered and should not be assumed to hold views expressed by anyone else on this blog. Today’s post is by William F. Vallicella (PhD, Boston College). Vallicella has taught philosophy at [Continue reading]

Class Therapy

November 18, 2016 Ragnar 12

Half of my feed is profs/grad students explaining how instead of teaching they conducted group therapy sessions with their students. Seriously, GTFO. First, your students need to grow up–no participation trophies for losing elections. That dumb sticker is all you get. In the words of Joe Rogan, “this is what happens when you give kids participation trophies for getting their asses kicked in soccer.” Second, most of the things they “worry” about are talking points [Continue reading]

What the Electoral College and the Free Will Defense Have in Common

November 16, 2016 Federal Philosopher 8

The electoral college, like Alvin Plantinga’s Free Will Defense, is criticized almost exclusively by people who don’t understand it. Both are also the kinds of things easier to understand in reverse: understanding first the overall upshot first helps to aid understanding of the nuts and bolts. With respect to the electoral college, it’s easy to find articles with heavy emphasis on the latter but light emphasis on the former. This is one of the better [Continue reading]