Academia looks at women in philosophy

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

An article in The New York Times mentions that a tenured professor at the University of Miami (FL, USA) gave up his post after allegations of sexual harassment of one of his female students. This brought to light the treatment of women in the philosophy field in general.

Here at Genius Forum, there has been much debate over the Woman issues, and how it relates to women and men. Many do feel that women get a rougher indoctrination than men do - though I attest it is possible for a female to prove her worth as a philosopher around here - but what about in the field of philosophy as a whole? Or in any field? How much stereotyping must a quality thinker who happens to be female have to fight through to prove her worth in your opinion? Males are not given an easy run either, and may even be given fewer chances when they fail- but what about breaking through the glass ceiling? Do you think that women get an extra foot up only so long as it brings them to the base crowd, but then face extra challenges before being given recognition?

[Cory Duchesne]

I think there's too much emphasis on esteeming oneself in the eyes of others - not just in academia, but everywhere. I can't sympathize with the insatiable and endless need people have for more self-esteem.

I don't think we need any new ideas. Old ideas expressed in new ways, sure. But you don't need to go to university to do that.

The problem is you have these academics who are ignoring, neglecting, misunderstanding and denigrating philosophical solutions offered long ago in exchange for "getting comfortable." Theirs is "the despair of weakness" which only concerns itself with fortune and misfortune, a desire to gain and fear of losing, and this becomes a never endless anxiety about shallow things.

Therefore, the world is designed to manipulate you into the default shallow state that everyone is in. We are all manipulated into becoming a source of pleasure for each other starting at a very young age. Because this process is moderately or extremely abusive (depending on the parents) the adults go their whole lives trying to fill a hole inside them. The hole is essentially narcissistic - my face being recognized by your face, minus a clear sense that you are in fact a separate soul from my own.

A good example is the the dutiful husband who makes his wife wine, bottle after bottle. Keeps her drunk and foolish, and next thing you know she's drinking every night, by his design. Naturally, there's little evidence that alcohol and sexual encounters do anything other than degrade the mind, although I've seen many people try to cite cases that say otherwise. Anyway, that's what university life is increasingly like. In fact, the western world itself is more and more like this big high school where no one really grows up. There's a chronic state of anxiety, envy and restlessness that pervades everything and "recognition" is not the solution. Of course, neither is notoriety, which is just a more underhanded form of narcissism. We've reached a point where we literally have to conquer fame. That's why, if I were McGinn, I wouldn't be too broken up over the loss of tenure. If he has any sanity at all left to him he'll enjoy the change of scenery. If he's completely lost his soul, he'll be locked into regret, never having the faith and creativity to transcend it.

[Pye]

The discussion has been fueled partly by Mr. McGinn’s own blog, where his use of the cryptic language of analytic philosophy in attempts to defend himself seems to have backfired.

nyuck, nyuck . . .

Elizabeth, thanks even moreso for the link buried in the link with ongoing discussion of these gendered 'professional' experiences. I think your thoughts about an easier "welcome in; now stay in your place" are rather spot on. Over my [non]tenure, I have seen several female philosophers hired by the department at the big uni whose teaching demonstrations when in competition for the job demonstrated more of a broad lack than a pointed aptitude.

But now it's getting like this: philosophy departments seem to want to look like Coke commercials wherein we'd-like-to-teach-the-world-to-sing. You know - models of diversity. The last recent tenure track hires have been Latino, Asian (Korean), and Romanian (all males). The last female hires have been Af-Am and New York Jewish. This is not a joke. It seems these days, as with so many other things, the "form," the shape of a given department is given an essence before it exists.

When you watch from your own end of things the lowered standards for a philosophy degree in general, it's hard to imagine any of these people fresh out of graduate school having much of a handle on much. But the academy has to justify itself; it has to hire back the most expensive degrees and fulfill certain agendas in doing so, so that it can justify its own discipline in a self-eating, urobouric kind of way . . . .

I heard once (with my own ears) an old-bull tenure say to a relatively new female hire that she should not be complaining about making a little less than a male because she was married. After all, she had other income available to her; a husband in the mode of "support."

omg, don't get me started . . . .

[ewil]

[...] though I attest it is possible for a female to prove her worth as a philosopher around here - but what about in the field of philosophy as a whole? Or in any field? How much stereotyping must a quality thinker who happens to be female have to fight through to prove her worth in your opinion? [...]

There is nothing to fight so no need to do such things, the stereotyping is just a straw-man being propped up.
Also, who would she be trying to prove worth to? Why must she? I have to agree with Cory here.

It is the output that will stand on it's own merits and reflect the quality of the mediator.

[Dan Rowden]

The internet proves that men are far more interested in philosophy than women. I think a far more pertinent question is how many of the people doing academic courses in philosophy actually give a shit about philosophy?

[Beingof1]

Thank you Cory, you have expanded and are helping. For that I give thanks.

My experience tells me I am living in an insane asylum. It is called planet earth. The inmates have taken over in almost every field. Religion, science, politics, you name it, the nutcases are in charge.

Insanity is given different definitions according to the context. Repeating the same action over and over expecting different results(therapeutic) , the inability to discern right from wrong(legal) and believing in something outside the norm (slang). The truth is, insanity means the inability to discern or own up to reality. Cory nailed it when he said how one appears to others is paramount in an insane society. The reference Pye gave to the 'tenured all knowing professor' denigrating a woman because she is married compared to his own greatness has no relevance in a sane world.

If I were to begin to describe the experience of enlightenment it would contain the expressions - you must repeat the same actions expecting different results, transcend the belief in right and wrong and you most certainly will be outside the norm in your understanding.

What can one do?

[Dennis Mahar]

'Looking Good' is the worldliness of the world worlding.

Survival domain.
A set of assessments
A range of options
A winning formula

Not broken.
It is what it is and isn't what it isn't.
Human nature.

Trek into the Andes, climb the highest peak,
get a sense of Milky Way in your vision.
Vent you spleen, spill your guts, rant your rant.

Notice anything?

Ineffable silence.

If you're gonna 'eat world'
eat the fuckin' thing.
no point letting it eat you into submission, into an insidious persistent complaint, into a resignation, into being reconciled in impossibilities.
Get some guts.

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

I think there's too much emphasis on esteeming oneself in the eyes of others - not just in academia, but everywhere. I can't sympathize with the insatiable and endless need people have for more self-esteem.

You nailed it there. It's the ego rearing it's ugly head, no doubt.

I don't think we need any new ideas. Old ideas expressed in new ways, sure.

But what if there are new ideas? It seems unlikely, I know - but it could be well worth the search.

But you don't need to go to university to do that.

Totally agreed. If anything, university seems to slow down the thinking process. Mostly it just teaches regurgitation of the thoughts of others.

I'm not opposed to researching the thoughts of others - it can save a lot of time, and allow the opportunity to build on the ideas of giants, and some people learn better in an academic environment. I just agree that academia isn't the beat-all-end-all.

[Cory Duchesne]

But what if there are new ideas? It seems unlikely, I know - but it could be well worth the search.

I think now is the time to tidy up a bit. There is such an excessive surplus of work that has been neglected that to focus on new ideas is like asking for another diamond ring when you already have a large jewelry box that you've gotten bored with. Even scientific, technology related stuff seems so overblown that we could benefit more from ironing out the details. If we can perfect the details and cleanly reap and glean the past work, only then should we feel warranted to push further. Of course, I'm fully aware that humans will continue doing novel things in genetics, physics, computer science and space travel. There's obviously no stopping them. But my personal position is to focus on just using what we have rather than asking for more. The problem is related to mismanagement of boredom, unchecked vanity and a need for more self esteem, essentially. Even the best of us are probably unconscious of vanity and pride, including myself. But the ones who don't even think about it should cause us the most concern.

[Dennis Mahar]

What's implicit in your Inquiry Corey, Elisabeth is Social Construct as a Context.

You're saying currently is not 'Looking Good' parlayed out of a set of assessments, out of that a range of options are disclosed and the suggestion of a Winning Formula for 'looking good' is a possibility for showing up if citizens can act it out.

Social engineers.
Survival option.

When you say 'ego's' it looks like you're saying mavericks or individuated persons are fucking up the possibility of a 'good looking herd'.

Cookie cutting machine turning out gingerbread men.

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

But what if there are new ideas? It seems unlikely, I know - but it could be well worth the search.

I think now is the time to tidy up a bit. There is such an excessive surplus of work that has been neglected that to focus on new ideas is like asking for another diamond ring when you already have a large jewelry box that you've gotten bored with. Even scientific, technology related stuff seems so overblown that we could benefit more from ironing out the details. If we can perfect the details and cleanly reap and glean the past work, only then should we feel warranted to push further. Of course, I'm fully aware that humans will continue doing novel things in genetics, physics, computer science and space travel. There's obviously no stopping them. But my personal position is to focus on just using what we have rather than asking for more. The problem is related to mismanagement of boredom, unchecked vanity and a need for more self esteem, essentially. Even the best of us are probably unconscious of vanity and pride, including myself. But the ones who don't even think about it should cause us the most concern.

Agreed that now is the time to tidy up a bit, but still disagreed on whether to look for new ideas. I think that there are enough time and people to do both.

Also agreed on "The problem is related to mismanagement of boredom, unchecked vanity and a need for more self esteem," and that needs work, too. Agreed that the ones who don't even think about it are of the most concern. Time must also be made for waking them up at least a little bit, but I don't think that it would be a good use of our time to spend too much time on each individual to do that. They must be spoon-fed the awakening process.

There are also different levels of thinkers (obviously) and at each level, there is a different priority of time allocation, both for the benefit of others and for the growth of that thinker. Too much of a generalization of what everybody should do can lead to time and effort mismanagement.

[Pye]

I give just one example of the happy mess I find myself in these days with the awesome influx of international students in recent years and their 'error-filled' ways in their struggle with english, much less philosophy. As much as I have to look for the clue-words of substance in the expressions of a native speaker, I have to be on High Alert for the Kuwaitis, the Saudis, the Bulgarians, the Koreans, the Japanese, the Chinese . . . .

Just recently, a young Chinese student in an intro class was trying to express his understanding of Nietzsche where Nietzsche is putting-forth about the purpose of purpose. He took those compounded words after reading the aphorism and replied:

"It for living reason."

Okay, yeah, well, he's missing the verb of being, he's juxtaposed his prepositional phrase (reason-for-living), and I dutifully corrected and all, but seriously. What's he "not" getting here?

Sometimes I find the word-fuck from a bright international student a hundred times more revealing than the stiff care from a non-caring native . . . .

"living reason."

yo buddy, you know? :)
Yo.

[Cory Duchesne]

Agreed that now is the time to tidy up a bit, but still disagreed on whether to look for new ideas. I think that there are enough time and people to do both.

I guess I could agree with you in some sense. It's not so much a matter of whether or not people should or should not look for new ideas, the fact is, they are going to look for them. Chances are, these new ideas are just old ideas dressed up in new ways, with the discoverer fooling himself into thinking it's new.

However, in things like computer engineering, simulation design and materials engineering, there will surely be new discoveries and novel societal organization. Science, by definition, always has the capacity to "incline".

As for a philosophy department in university, philosophy is unique insofar as it is "timeless". What was true for the ancients is true for us. Philosophy is not something that evolves, but rather, declines or degenerates.

I think one of the most radical, novel contributions to philosophy in our age was Robert Greene's work, Mastery, 33 Strategies of War, Laws of Seduction and Laws of Power.

However, if you read his work closely, he's just synthesizing all of western and eastern history's wisdom together. He's not saying anything new, but just finding a new way to say it.

And of course, he did it outside of academia.

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

Cory, we may actually come to agreement this time ;)

Agreed that many of the new ideas are really old ideas dressed up as new ideas. Maybe we need to define what are old ideas vs new ideas.

I heard once (with my own ears) an old-bull tenure say to a relatively new female hire that she should not be complaining about making a little less than a male because she was married. After all, she had other income available to her; a husband in the mode of "support."

(thank you Pye for presenting such a poignant example)

I'd say that the "old-bull tenure" was using old ideas. I'd say that newer ideas would be along the lines of old feminism where a female doing equal work should make equal pay.

I don't know my history of philosophy very well, so I may be wrong on this, but I think that feminism is a new way of thinking. I also distinguish between new feminism, which seems misandrist to me, and old/original feminism, which seemed more about equal rights, and the rights for men to get treated with the same "woman's privilege" as females get.

The most important thing is to get the right ideas, whether they are new or old.

Pye, I wonder how much of an artificial boost the international students get from giving them the benefit of the doubt of using English as a second language?

[Dennis Mahar]

Men pour themselves into women as her being a cupness to hold him.
Take that!
wham, bam, thankyou ma'am.

Women's Lib is a stand in that sense.

I'm not taking that shit.
Wrong cup.
Fuck off.
Wise Woman.

[Pye]

Obviously, one doesn't have to go to university to 'become' a philosopher, to make accomplishment with philosophy.
You just [might] have to go if you want to 'make a living' at it.

University degrees are about career, plain and simple. Career is about how one makes a living.

For myself, getting what I do for a living to run alongside what matters to me in life leaves all the hoop-jumping I had to do, all the credentialling and other hierarchical nonsense in the dust.

One's greatest prize from all the hoop-jumping et al is embodied in the term "academic freedom." Right where things seem the tightest (academy), one's freedom to teach what and whatever they choose to design their courses around is unmitigatingly protected, no matter who-else in the department it pisses off.

Training wheels; then the wheels fall off. That's when one can start getting some serious traction . . . .

I did it to make a living at how I live. I wish everybody could make a living at how they live . . . .

[Cory Duchesne]

If I were to begin to describe the experience of enlightenment it would contain the expressions - you must repeat the same actions expecting different results, transcend the belief in right and wrong and you most certainly will be outside the norm in your understanding. What can one do?

I agree roughly with Meister Eckhart:

"All God wants of man is a peaceful heart."

I guess by God he must be all of us. Who doesn't want to be treated with respect?

And you're right, there is a lot of repetition. If you can't help but remember a wrong that was done against you, you have have to struggle to think about it from multiple points of view. I don't believe in blocking things out, but rather, I believe in repeating a crime as if life was meant to be an an exercise in perspective. That way, forgiveness becomes a form of non-forgiveness, but it's also not a forgetting.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, beingof1. Best to you.

[Beingof1]

Cory Duchesne

I agree roughly with Meister Eckhart:

"All God wants of man is a peaceful heart."

I guess by God he must be all of us. Who doesn't want to be treated with respect?

And you're right, there is a lot of repetition. If you can't help but remember a wrong that was done against you, you have have to struggle to think about it from multiple points of view. I don't believe in blocking things out, but rather, I believe in repeating a crime as if life was meant to be an an exercise in perspective. That way, forgiveness becomes a form of non-forgiveness, but it's also not a forgetting.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, beingof1. Best to you.

Well said sir - we forget what we needed to forgive and experience freedom from excess baggage. It becomes natural and instinctive, what liberty!

Agape bro