I have been thinking about this often. FTF conferences are often touted as great networking opportunities, but if you comes from a low-prestige program or are an MA student you're often just being ignored. The APA "smoker" reception is a good example of how this works 1/
When I was a job candidate with a diploma from an obscure European program, I'd just stand around at that reception holding a glass and no-one to talk to. Meanwhile, you had the stars from the top department everyone would flock to. Eventually, I found some other job seekers 2/
And we had great conversations. Still, conferences reinforce hierarchies. The informality of that in between talk results in a lot of people being left out of that talk. How can conferences provide more equitable opportunities for informal networking? 3/
Also, how can we create opportunities for informal mentoring outside of conferences? A question I discussed with other @Phil4Sustain and perhaps something we can broach in the Philosophers' Cocoon @marcusarvan /end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
One of the things I'm excited about in this semester's grad seminar is I'll be teaching students how to write public philosophy! Nuts and bolts and all. Here's a little 🧵 with some of the things we are covering 1/
Here I'll talk about some general principles that apply to public philosophy writing. This can take many forms, e.g.,
* an op-ed (500 words or so) in a newspaper
* a longer-form essay in a magazine (e.g., @TheRavenMag1@aeonmag)
* your own blog/substack (do not underestimate!) 2/
* a popular piece in edited volume such as in Wiley-Blackwell's @andphilosophy series
* a twitter thread
(and other things I am probably forgetting)
I will not be covering podcasts and other non-written or non-purely written formats (e.g., games, artwork) here 3/
Have been pondering the following: if people are vulnerable/susceptible to misinformation due to a polarized anti-science stance in their communities (which long predates Covid) would we call this a violation of their epistemic rights, and a form of epistemic injustice? 1/
I am inclined to see the lack of scientific literacy and polarized anti-scientific literacy in some communities here as a violation of people's epistemic rights, drawing on this book by Lani Watson (which is awesome) routledge.com/The-Right-to-K… 2/
For Watson, an epistemic right is "a complex entitlement that provides justification for the performance and prohibition of actions and omissions concerning epistemic goods", such as true beliefs, being guarded from false beliefs, understanding etc. 3/
December 2020 to December 2021 I went from zero published stories to several. Here's a thread to celebrate the stories. I know it's self-promotion but it was damn difficult to learn to write fiction at a decent enough level to be published. 1/
Soul sleep, in the magazine 96th of October (Dec 2020 issue, ca 2200 words), genre: fantasy. Written in full lockdown this story took as starting point the fear of being buried alive, mixed in some Kierkegaard despair 2/ 96thofoctober.com/articles/soul-…
Cave of Adventure (fantasy, 3000) in After Dinner Conversation (not freely readable, sorry, PDC net) is basically a take on Nozick's experience machine in a fantasy setting, namely the artificial caves in Ghent's Citadel park I lived close to for years 3/ pdcnet.org/adc/content/ad…
I love the 17th c genre of early scientists, such as Vermeer's Astronomer) but only discovered this painting recently. A portrait of an unknown mathematician, with attributes of an astronomer and geometer by the female portrait artist Mary Beale (1633-1699)
Mary Beale was a business partner to Charles Beale, a cloth merchant (a rather intimate and relaxed portrait of him by her here, ca. 1680), and an important breadwinner to her family. The couple had a large circle of friends, including early scientists and painter Sir Peter Lely.
Mary Beale was highly productive, charging five pounds for a painting of a head and ten pounds for half of a body. She earned 200 GDP/year painting portraits, giving a percentage to charity.
More works here (her son, Isaac Barrow, unknown woman)
Since one has to strike while the iron is hot, here is my attempt to summarize the Critique of Pure Reason by Kant (1781) in a series of tweets.
(I am not a Kant scholar and so it's gonna be wrong but that's no problem since Kant scholars can just take what I did & improve) 1/??
(preamble: this is meant for my non-philosophy audience since most philosophers know all of this probably better than I do as I shamefully only read CPR when I was in my early thirties. Sorry. I read the excellent Guyer & Wood translation which combines A and B edition. 2/
Ok so Kant (1724 – 1804) lived most of his life in Königsberg, Prussia (now Kaliningrad in Russia).
He is known for the following key publications
Critique of Pure Reason (1781)
Critique of Practical Reason (1788)
Critique of Judgement (1790).
Now what does "critique" mean?
3/
Started with the Graeber and Wengrow book (it's long and I have a zillion things to do so it will take a while to get through). Interesting. As a philosopher w background in anthropology and archaeology, I hope to write something of interest about this book.
Can I just start w a couple of quibbles? I understand the scope of this book is vast but Graeber and Wengrow's discussion about the Kula ring as purely ceremonial exchange (they adapt this from Malinowski, who wanted to make a point with this) is factually wrong.
Malinowski deliberately downplayed the trade that went on together with the Kula ring exchange of bracelets and necklaces to make a point--Oceania specialists have known this for a long time, so it was a bit disappointing to see that in the book. Anyway. Expect more quibbles.