Forums/Links

Further resources:

Our Facebook page, with an intimate discussion group.

Buy a T-shirt or mug or something!

Note: The discussion forum at urbanphilosophy.net is temporarily(?) down due to hacking.

The giant store of Mark music , and info on current shows and stuff.

The Cartoon Stand. Ken Gerber’s page o’ comix on demand.

If you’re looking for more information on the readings and people we cover (I know we’re not consistent about giving such basic details of when these people lived), there’s usually a good summary at Wikipedia, and if you want a bit more depth, try the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Need web hosting or custom programming? The guys at rootlevelservices.com, who provide space and bandwidth for some of these very large files, are absolutely top notch.

(If you know of anything we should definitely add here, send it to me.)

  1. #1 by Phil at WWF on November 7th, 2009

    Partially Examined Life guys,

    So, thanks, I guess, for responding to my email “on the air.”

    With regard to Seth’s distinctions between cynicism about academic philosophy, cynicism about graduate school, cynicism about UT’s program, etc., what I had in mind in my first email was cynicism about academic philosophy. I was hoping you guys might say a little about the formalization of philosophy as an academic discipline. I think I remember a bit in one of your earlier podcasts about the difference between Descartes’ first person, stream of consciousness writing style in the Meditations and today’s literature-citing, bureaucratic approach to doing philosophy.

    More directly, do you think that the discipline of philosophy in its contemporary academic form can be useful beyond one’s individual personal fulfillment, or has the academy, through formalization, weakened it’s potential to reach and enlighten people on a mass scale?

    Word,
    Phil at WWF

    Quote

  2. #2 by Seth on November 9th, 2009

    Hey Phil - good to hear from you. Mark actually touched on this in one of the last two episodes (Kant or the soon to be released Nietzsche episode, can’t remember which). I think philosophy as an academic discipline suffers no more or less than any other subject that is ‘academized’.

    The Academy is a business whose products are ‘knowledge’ and ‘education’ - which is the transmission of knowledge. As a worker, your job is to either produce knowledge, transmit knowledge, or both. The ability to transcend straight knowledge transmission to a dialectical relationship where mutual exploration or wisdom sharing is possible only really starts at the graduate level and truly only happens when one is working directly with an involved mentor/advisor. [Yes, this can happen at the undergraduate level at small colleges, but I'm speaking generally here.]

    Mark’s point in the recent cast was that professors now can’t create free-flowing works on major ’subjects’ because they must get tenure, which in turns means publishing, which in turn means being accepted by peer review groups, which in turn means adhering to the institutionalized norms, etc. This means writing commentaries and criticisms of other works, usually. Only when what you publish ‘doesn’t matter’, can you actually say what ‘really matters’.

    The consequence of this is that many people in academic philosophy treat it like a job and, I think, aren’t either passionate or frankly that good. Certainly not the types likely to ultimately write anything that will survive their generation.

    So, to answer your point, I think that academic philosophy has, structurally, weakened it’s potential to reach and enlighten people by creating an atmosphere where people who otherwise wouldn’t get a forum for their ideas become tools and where people who deserve to have their unique voices heard get pressured into silencing those voices. [Insert sour grapes comment here]

    What’s more concerning to me is that Philosophy as a discipline has lost (if it ever had) its reputation as a source of meaning, truth, insight and significance for a larger audience. Even assuming the general populace is not aware of the academic factions, specialization, petty politics and other sundry activites in the tower, the discipline as a whole has little cultural relevance.

    It’s “Chicken Soup for the Soul”, “The Five People You Meet in Heaven”, literature, new age metaphysics, self-help books, etc. People are looking for answers, but answers which are given, not those which come from self-reflective insight and a generous curiosity about assumptions. Philosophy doesn’t give answers, it makes the questions harder, but much more interesting. No one really wants that. And fortunately, few academic philosophers are laboring to give that to them.

    Quote
(will not be published)

  1. No trackbacks yet.