Showing posts with label Critical thinking. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Critical thinking. Show all posts

Monday, June 17, 2024

Academic Cats and Dogs: Does Academia Need to Get Weirder to Survive?


I’ve never been entirely comfortable in academia. Don’t get me wrong. I love reading and writing. I enjoy teaching and interacting with students. I’m fond of conversation about subjects most people don’t understand or care to understand. 

But in recent years—especially with the convergence of the pandemic, my tenure, and feeling middle age—I find myself caring less and less about academia as an abstract system of disciplines. I care about my friends, my colleagues, and my students. I care about philosophy as a global human endeavor. But I don’t care about being a Very Serious Academic. I’m not sure how much I ever really did. 

Sunday, December 3, 2023

Israel/Palestine: A Dialogue with Myself

Me: I’ve been thinking a lot about what’s happening in Israel/Palestine, but I’m not sure what to say. I haven’t been saying much about it. 

Me 2: But who are you to say anything? You’re not Jewish or Muslim, Israeli or Palestinian? Why should anyone care what you think? 

Me: I don’t know, honestly. Obviously, I relate to this issue differently and less personally than people more directly affected by it, or by the recent rise in antisemitism and Islamophobia here in the US. I guess maybe writing this is a way to figure out what I think? Maybe it could help others? Or they could tell me where I’m wrong? 

Sunday, November 19, 2023

Vacation Revelations: The Cabin at the End of the World by Paul Tremblay

 


I often find novels written in the present tense to be a bit gimmicky (like the author is trying too hard to make it feel immediate). I also don't always like horror that relies heavily on Christian symbolism (I can appreciate The Exorcist, but I prefer it when authors create new ideas to terrify us rather than riffing on centuries' old preexisting material). Yet somehow I really loved The Cabin at the End of the World, which probably says a lot about Tremblay's skills as an author. 

Monday, February 13, 2023

New Article: “Pramāṇavāda and the Crisis of Skepticism in the Modern Public Sphere” by Amy Donahue (Cross-posted from the Indian Philosophy Blog)

Depiction of a debate between Maṇḍana Miśra and Śaṅkara with judge Ubhaya Bhāratī

 

I haven't cross-posted anything from the Indian Philosophy Blog in a long time, so here you go! This is about a great article from my colleague Dr. Amy Donahue. There's also some information about an upcoming conference panel where she and I will be presenting with Dr. Arindam Chakrabarti. Check it out! 

PS: You can find the original post on the Indian Philosophy Blog here.


Readers of the Indian Philosophy Blog may be interested to learn about a new article in the latest issue of the Journal of World Philosophies: “Pramāṇavāda and the Crisis of Skepticism in the Modern Public Sphere” by Amy Donahue (Kennesaw State University). The journal is open-access, and you can download the article here.

Here’s the abstract:

There is widespread and warranted skepticism about the usefulness of inclusive and epistemically rigorous public debate in societies that are modeled on the Habermasian public sphere, and this skepticism challenges the democratic form of government worldwide. To address structural weaknesses of Habermasian public spheres, such as susceptibility to mass manipulation through “ready-to-think” messages and tendencies to privilege and subordinate perspectives arbitrarily, interdisciplinary scholars should attend to traditions of knowledge and public debate that are not rooted in western colonial/modern genealogies, such as the Sanskritic traditions of pramāṇavāda and vāda. Attention to vādapramāṇavāda, and other traditions like them can inspire new forms of social discussion, media, and digital humanities, which, in turn, can help to place trust in democracy on foundations that are more stable than mere (anxious) optimism.

I enjoyed reading the article, and I found it extremely thought-provoking. I hope readers of this blog will check it out. Also, be sure to look for the forthcoming online debate platform that Donahue mentions on p. 5! Maybe we’ll make an announcement on the blog when it’s ready. Or reach out to Dr. Donahue if you’re interested in collaborating.

Here are a few of my questions for further discussion:

  1. Since pramāṇavāda was an elite discourse in historical South Asian societies and it requires some educational training (as Donahue notes on p. 4 and p. 5), can it do the work Donahue asks it to do?
  2. Are jalpa and vitaṇḍā so bad? While most Naiyāyikas have denigrated them as illegitimate as Donahue notes (p. 6), a few have distinguished “tricky” and “honest” forms of vitaṇḍā (Matilal 1998, 3). And then there’s Śrī Harṣa’s debate at the beginning of the Khaṇḍanakhaṇḍakhādya with a Naiyāyika opponent about whether one must accept the means of knowledge (pramāṇas) in order to enter into a debate about the pramāṇas (he mentions that one understands the discourse of the Madhyamakas and Cārvākas, perhaps thinking of Nāgārjuna and Jayarāśi; I will have more to say about the Cārvākas in an upcoming conference presentation—see information below). Matilal has also argued that vitaṇḍā can make sense as resulting in a “commitmentless denial” similar to an “illocutionary negation” (Matilal 1998, 50-56). In terms of a modern public sphere, could vitaṇḍā be a useful tactic for, say, pointing out the inherent contradictions of various harmful dogmatisms? Or maybe the deepest benefit of the vāda-jalpa-vitaṇḍā framework is a bit of self-awareness about which form of debate one is using?
  3. Is vāda necessarily more prone to discrediting false beliefs than a Habermasian public sphere or the type of marketplace of ideas in John Stuart Mill’s On Liberty? (p. 11) My point is most definitely not that we have nothing to learn from Indian logic and debate. Far from it! But I wonder how effective vāda can be. After all, you don’t find much philosophical agreement in the classical Indian tradition, which is precisely why I find it so interesting!
  4. Is the archive (p. 12) essentially part of vāda, or is it a cultural artifact of the Indian and Tibetan tradition of commentaries? Was there something similar in Hellenistic, Roman, Islamic, and Byzantine traditions, which were also heavily commentarial?

My questions here are meant to be taken in the spirit of vāda to keep the conversation going. I hope others will read Donahue’s thought-provoking article and join this worthwhile conversation.

Also, if you will be attending the upcoming Central APA Conference in Denver, Colorado, USA on Feb. 22, 2023, you will have the chance to discuss these and other issues in person! 

Wed. Feb. 22, 2023, 1-4pm

2022 Invited Symposium: Vāda: Indian Logic and Public Debate 

Chair: Jarrod Brown (Berea College)

Speakers: 

Amy Donahue (Kennesaw State University) “Vāda Project: A Non-Centric Method for Countering Disinformation”

Arindam Chakrabarti (University of Hawai’i at Manoa) “Does the Question Arise? Questioning the Meaning of Questions and the Definability of Doubt”

Ethan Mills (University of Tennessee at Chattanooga)  “Cārvāka Skepticism about Inference: Historical and Contemporary Examples” 

(More information about the conference here, including a draft program that includes several other panels on Indian philosophy.)

Works Cited

Donahue, Amy. 2022. “Pramāṇavāda and the Crisis of Skepticism in the Public Sphere.” Journal of World Philosophies 7 (Winter 2022): 1-14.

Matilal, Bimal Krishna.  1998.  The Character of Logic in India.  Edited by Jonardon Ganeri and Heeraman Tiwari.  Albany: SUNY Press.

Monday, November 29, 2021

Questions About “Freedom” in American Politics

 


American political discourse is drowning in freedom. After 9/11, many politicians assured us that the terrorists hated our freedoms. The Tea Party modeled itself on the American Revolution (a bit awkwardly since the government they wanted freedom from was the same government established by that revolution). Advocates for gun rights talk about freedom more than anyone else, such that one might easily believe they think the fundamental Ur-freedom of all humanity for all time has always been to keep and bear deadly firearms.

Sunday, August 29, 2021

Nondualism and the Pandemic, Part 2

A representation of Indra's Net

Continued from Part 1...


Dualism and Responsibility 

How did the US come to possess such a set of flaws that uniquely predisposed us to react to the pandemic as we have? There are large cultural and political forces that no one of us is uniquely responsible for, but each of us bears some responsibility for. I don’t deign to know your life, dear reader, so let me think through my own example.


Nondualism and the Pandemic, Part 1

Photo Credit: https://www.reddit.com/r/Thailand/comments/gg7eu4/a_statue_of_buddha_wears_a_face_mask_at_a/ 

 

A text written by a Buddhist monk 1,000 years ago probably seems like a remote concern in comparison to the pandemic we’ve been living through since March 2020. And of course, that’s true. I’m not going to claim that medical professionals should all stop what they’re doing and pick up ancient Sanskrit texts.

 

 

A Personal Connection?

 

But there is a connection for me personally. When the pandemic was declared in March 2020, I was in the early stages of a new research project on the 11th century Indian Buddhist philosopher Ratnakīrti. I was looking at one of his texts that modern scholars often read as a defense of solipsism—the view that there is only one mind, of which we are all part. 

 

Solipsism is heady stuff (even if there is only one head!), but I wondered if Ratnakīrti’s point might run in a different direction. As a Buddhist philosopher heavily influenced by the Yogācāra tradition and its emphasis on nondualism, I thought that maybe Ratnakīrti’s point isn’t that there is one mind (my mind?) but rather that the very concept of discrete minds totally walled off from one another is an illusion in the context of nondualism, which in turn is a philosophical development of the idea of non-self. If there is no self, separate from the rest of the world, then the very concept of an individual, discrete mind is nonsensical.

Sunday, March 7, 2021

Random Thoughts, Part 13: Our Random 2021

 

Made at: https://www.jasondavies.com/wordcloud/


My previous entry in my Random Thoughts series was in November 2020, so with this post my Random Thoughts series rolls into 2021! There are still plenty of random thoughts to be had in this new and strange year. I've got stuff on philosophy (of course), but also recipes, medical stuff, Taco Bell, conspiracy theories, and Coming to America.

And as I started doing in 2020, I'll include some recent memes that amused me just to keep things more random.

Sunday, August 2, 2020

Hugo Results 2020, and Award Ceremony Controversy




The Hugo Awards were announced the other day (Friday night for me in the US and Saturday in New Zealand). You can see the complete run down of voting statistics here. Congratulations to all the winners and nominees!

This year I voted in eight categories. Usually I do more, but ... <gestures toward the world right now>.... You can see how I voted here and here.

There was also the matter of the ceremony itself. I watched most of it live. There was some controversy about it, and rightfully so. I'll come back to that at the end.

But first, how did I do? 

Wednesday, March 4, 2020

Random Thoughts, Part 8


Made at: https://www.jasondavies.com/wordcloud/


My series of posts on my random thoughts continues to roll randomly along... Now get ready for Part 8!


147. I don’t really feel like I fit into the discipline of philosophy, but it’s not so bad because I’ve never really felt like I fit in anywhere else, either.

148. Nostalgia both distorts the past and limits the present.

149. You’re supposed to become more of a morning person as you get older, but in the last 20 years I’ve gone from “I’d rather not do this in the morning, but I will be there” to “I am unavailable before noon.”

150. There seem to be two main responses to attempts to make philosophy curricula more inclusive: “Cool, let’s try it!” versus “I don’t know, is that really philosophy?”

151. I like arguments and discussions, but most of what happens these days is bickering, which is a great deal more exhausting and pointless.

152. I’m tired of bickering. I’m tired of conversation as combat. I’d rather have real arguments.

153. Bickering looks like argument, but it is a simulacrum of argument.

154. There must be a test to tell the difference between fighting the good fight and being pointlessly combative, but I’m not always sure what it is. Maybe it’s this: is the other person a potential ally or are you making a point for the sake of an audience?

155. When did it become cool to hate things?

156. Something in a society has gone deeply wrong when it becomes possible for many people in that society to sincerely believe that caring about other people is unnatural or irrational.

157. A possible definition of philosophy: Philosophers are people who spend the most time thinking about the things most normal people think about the least.

158. Alternatively--Philosophers: We think about stuff so you don’t have to!

159. I figured out something that bothers me about the way many people interact offline but especially online these days: a lack of self-deprecation. There is plenty of giving other people shit for the purposes of raising one’s self-estimation, but little of this shit is reserved for oneself. But what do I know? I’m not very observant.

160. I think in some cases a lack of self-deprecating humor indicates a much deeper character flaw. It shows that a person is incapable or unwilling to reflect on their own limitations and fallibilities; they don’t see themselves from a comedic distance, which often demonstrates a lack of empathy or ability to imagine others’ perspectives.

161. Someone mentioned this already, but I keep seeing it happen that in recent years parts of the American left have become more like the problematic parts of the right: a persecution complex, with-me-or-against-me dichotomies, go-for-the-jugular straw man arguments, repetition of manufactured attack points, jokes/memes that are more mean than funny, the idea that not changing one’s opinions over time is somehow inherently a good thing, approaching all discussions as combat… But all of this is combined with a thoroughly leftist tendency to eat one’s own, so the left failed to learn the one actually useful lesson from the right: the value of putting aside minor differences for the sake of gaining greater political power.

162. Some enduring mysteries of the universe:
Why is it so hard for some people to use their turn signals?
How do people get ear buds to stay in their ears?
Why don’t students do the reading?
Why are some foods considered breakfast foods?

163. Maybe things have always been like this, but it seems that these days many people adopt a sort of non-intellectual fideism about all of their beliefs, not just religious ones: they just kind of have their beliefs, come what may. Because of this, the penchant of philosophers (especially philosophy teachers) to ask what your beliefs mean and how we could know they are right is likely to sound like complete nonsense—you possess beliefs, you don’t examine them!

164. I feel this is a possibility too easily ignored: maybe everybody is wrong, even me.

165. A strange trend in conspiracy theories in recent years: “It appears that many other people like a politician I don’t like. A malevolent conspiracy is the only possible way to explain this appearance.”

166. How much of our notions of popularity and related ideas (electability, etc.) are based on the small and non-representative sample of “people I know on social media”?

167. Getting a PhD keeps you young: it gives you the student loan debt, income, and career stage of a much younger person.

168. One of the sad things about the last several years of American politics is that the list of people I can’t really talk to about politics now includes many people I mostly agree with.

169. Politics and economics are two areas of human activity in which people think they are being rational, but are often based on unfounded assumptions, sloppy conjectures, and wishful thinking. What’s weirdest to me, though, is that anyone thinks economics is more rational than politics.

170. Righteous indignation is not always the correct response to disagreement.

171. You can tell a lot about philosophers by what they think the besetting sin of philosophy is. For me it is dogmatism, which I guess maybe explains my fondness for skepticism.

172. How much human misery is caused by convincing ourselves we know things we in fact have no business claiming to know?

173. “Western philosophy” is not a natural kind.

174. I’m partially colorblind, have no eye for design, and am almost completely fashion-blind. These things may not be unrelated.

175. The sad thing about the lack of trying to take another person’s perspective that seems common these days isn’t that people are incapable of doing it, but that they don’t even seem to want to try.

176. I’m not a very good skeptic. I have lots of opinions. But sometimes my skeptical tendencies stop me from sharing them too widely or too forcefully.

177. A bit of skeptical therapy for election seasons: Nobody actually knows what the results of an election are going to be before it happens. “Electability” doesn’t really mean anything, and it says more about the people using the label than the person it applies to. Using past elections to predict future elections would require more understanding of what happened in the past than most of us possess. A general sense of foreboding doom may be unavoidable for various psychological reasons, but it shouldn’t be based on knowledge of future events that none of us possess.


Sunday, October 6, 2019

Was Social Media a Huge Mistake?



Was social media a huge mistake?

This is a question I’ve been thinking about a lot lately. From large scale harms like the propaganda machines of Russian troll farms to smaller issues like the way random acquaintances treat each other on your Facebook page, it seems that social media was maybe a colossal mistake on the part of humanity.

I’m not saying social media is all bad. If it weren’t for Facebook, I’d have lost touch with a lot of friends over the years. Twitter has connected me with philosophers around the world. And of course there was plenty of propaganda and rudeness long before social media.

My concern isn’t so much that social media makes new bad things. Humans have always been intellectually and morally fallible. My concern is that it exacerbates our weaknesses in a deeply unhealthy way.

Monday, August 5, 2019

Random Thoughts, Part 5


Made at: https://www.jasondavies.com/wordcloud/

A while back I started posting collections of my random thoughts.  You can see the latest collection, Part 4, here.  You can see Part 5 right here, right now, right below!

Thursday, May 9, 2019

Four Reasons Why I Love Stephen King’s Dark Tower Series (and You Might, Too)




Sometime in the last couple years a strange thing happened to me.  I became a serious fan of a series I had set aside 25 years ago and had always assumed was not my thing.  If you had told me three years ago that I would be writing a post proselytizing the Dark Tower series (see above!), I may not have believed you.  Alas, the wheel of ka turns in unexpected ways.

I read the first two books many years ago in my teens.  The first book is very weird.  I thought it was some kind of fantasy-Western hybrid, which is true but there are oh, so many more layers than these. The second book is less weird, but for whatever reason didn't grab me at the time, although I did remember certain scenes far more clearly than I remember most things I read last week.

Having rekindled my relationship with Stephen King in recent years, having heard from people whose opinions I respect how great the series is, and with the 2017 Dark Tower movie coming out (yeah, I know... but I kinda liked it, anyway), I thought it might be time to give these books another try.  I re-read The Gunslinger and The Drawing of the Three in the summer of 2017 (see what I thought here!), but I wasn't quite hooked.  I wasn't yet, in the common term of palaver, a "Tower junkie."

That happened sometime in The Wastelands or Wizard and Glass, which led me to Wolves of the Calla.  Somehow I waited a few months for the most mind-bending last two books, Song of Susannah and The Dark Tower.  And then I had to read the stand alone The Wind Through the Keyhole.  I put off writing this post for awhile, but now that I've read a few more of King's books with Dark Tower connections (Insomnia and Hearts in Atlantis), it seemed that now is the time.

So, here are four reasons why I love Stephen King's Dark Tower series, and you might, too.

Friday, March 22, 2019

Book Blogs Back!: Responses to Malcolm Keating – Chapters 6-7 (Śrī Harṣa) and Conclusion

My book with a Starfleet Academy mug: both seeking the final frontier?


This is continuation of my responses to Malcolm Keating's excellent blog posts on my book, Three Pillars of Skepticism in Classical India: Nāgārjuna, Jayarāśi, and Śrī Harṣa, which Malcolm wrote in preparation for an event on March 7, 2019.  You can see my previous responses here and here.

In the present post I'm responding to two of Malcolm's posts, which you can find here and here.  As will become clear, this post isn't going to make much sense without reading Malcolm's posts first.

So, here we go!

Tuesday, October 16, 2018

Are College Students Relativists?




Several weeks ago I came up with the following hypothesis.

Hypothesis: College students aren't actually relativists in a normative philosophical sense as many philosophy teachers love to complain about, but rather students look at philosophical questions through a sort of descriptive "pop social science" lens. That is, they don't understand the distinction between the question "What is the truth?" and the question "What do people say is the truth?" Very little in our broader culture or education system prepares them to answer the Socratic question, "What should I personally think is the truth?" beyond unargued personal preference.
Corollary 1: Go easy on your students, philosophy teachers. We are asking them to do something our entire culture (and maybe even human nature) either militates against or deems literally unthinkable.
Corollary 2: This maybe also explains a lot about why philosophy and the humanities more generally are so misunderstood, disrespected, and ignored by the larger culture.

Wednesday, July 11, 2018

Pre-Prolegomena to Future Discussions of Including Non-Western Philosophy in the Curriculum



If you come here for the science fiction or you aren't an academic philosopher, you may be surprised to learn that the academic discipline of philosophy is extremely Eurocentric. I've discussed this odd state of affairs on the blog before (for instance, here and here).

Over at the philosophy blog Daily Nous, the discussion of whether philosophy should try to be more inclusive came up yet again this week in a post called "End Philosophical Protectionism," which is in turn based on an interview with my friend and colleague Anand Vaidya at 3:AM MagazineAnd, as prophesied by Amy Olberding in an earlier post, the discussion in the Daily Nous comments section quickly took on some familiar beats.

Against my better judgment, I dipped my toes into the comments section.  As I read the comments, it occurred to me that maybe before the next one of these discussions takes place, we might stop to think about some things (we are, after all, philosophers!).  Maybe it's worth rethinking about some presuppositions and unquestioned assumptions that serve to make the familiar beats so annoyingly counter-productive.  To help, I came up with the following "Pre-Prolegomena to Future Discussions of Including Non-Western Philosophy in the Curriculum."  Enjoy!  Feel free to add your own pre-prolegomena in the comments.  (And thanks to Anand Vaidya, Amy Olberding, and Justin Weinberg for inspiring this post!)


Sunday, May 20, 2018

Review Bonanza, Part Two: The Expanse, The X-Files, Infomocracy, Navigators of Dune, and More!

The Expanse

As I mentioned in "Review Bonanza, Part One" I haven't been blogging quite as regularly in the last few months, so there are a lot of things I've meant to review that have sadly gone unreviewed on this blog.  In Part One I reviewed movies (Annihilation and The Laplace's Demon), fiction (River of Teeth), and non-fiction (The Island of Knowledge and Africa, Asia, and the History of Philosophy).

This time I've got two TV shows (The Expanse and The X-Files), two novels (Infomocracy and Navigators of Dune), and one work of non-fiction (What the Buddha Taught).  I even have a few more for Part Three, so stay tuned!  And despite my antipathy toward the superhero genre, I've also seen a few recent Marvel movies (Black Panther, Infinity War, and Deadpool 2), which I've decided to review in a separate Marvel Round Up post coming soon.

Monday, March 26, 2018

APA Blog Post: "Provincializing Europe in a World Philosophy Course"



My first ever post for the Blog of the American Philosophical Association has just gone live!  It's about a course I created recently called World Philosophy and what I think courses like this can do for the discipline of academic philosophy.  (You can jump to the whole thing here, or keep reading for a preview).

Here are few quotes to pique your interest...

Sunday, February 11, 2018

Reminders: Nazis are Bad and February is Black History Month


Credit: https://blog.utc.edu/news/2018/01/black-history-month-utc-2/

Maybe I was naïve, but until the last couple years I thought most people had figured out the whole "Nazis are bad" thing.  But then came the resurgence of explicit white nationalism and the "Unite the Right" rally in Charlottesville, VA.  More recently such hate has found its way to my own backyard: there was white nationalist propaganda featuring a picture of Hitler saying "Hitler was Right" pasted over a Black History Month sign at the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga on Wed. Feb. 7, 2018.  (See the image below).