Doomed?

Sleeping in the tub writes:

I am very curious to hear opinions from faculty about the following article: http://chronicle.com/jobs/news/2009/01/2009013001c.htm

...especially as it pertains to philosophy. I received my PhD a couple months ago, and I have to admit that I feel like I chose the wrong profession, but not because of any deficiency on my part in regard to what it has taken to be a professional philosopher. Rather, given the market this year, this seems like a dying field. I estimate that 25% of the TT jobs originally posted in the October JFP have been suspended or pulled, and there seems little to no sympathy or understanding coming from established faculty (especially those who have decided not to retire because their TIAA-Cref's have lost value). This is not about landing a 2/2 research position in a 'prime' location. This is about paying rent, buying food, and paying on loans. I realize that none of us were promised jobs when we finally 'got out,' but I have seen little to nothing from established philosophers that honestly addresses the economic crisis, especially as it pertains to our field (and to those of us suspended between graduate school and academic employment). The fall semester will be here sooner than many of us want it to be. Faculty, what is your honest advice? What do all of you really think is going to come of this profession?

Open thread

Any questions, gossipy or otherwise, that readers would like answered by other readers? Suggestions for new topics? Paranoid conspiracy theories? Post them in the comments and I'll turn some of them into separate posts.

Who is G** B**?

Inquiring minds want to know. If you don't know what this is about, see here.

Reader comments

Two anonymous comments seemed to merit a separate post:

I. I would like to know if there are people outside of the profession -- i.e., without having a job, or being a current student, in the academy -- who attempt (successfully or not) to publish in respectable journals. Does this ever happen?


II. Does anyone recall the scandal about the wealthy former philosophy graduate student who paid some big-name M&E people to review his article? I think that happened in 2002 or so, but I can't remember the details.

Talent and perseverance win out...sometimes

Somewhat related to the last post, my understanding is that Eric Olson spent a long time in the wilderness, including a period of unemployment, before finally publishing his way into a tenure track job at Sheffield. (Is it an accident that he ended up working at a British university, where the ability to publish is even more prized than in the U.S.?) What amazes me is that Olson was able to get a book deal with Oxford while he was still unemployed. The fact that the preeminent publisher of philosophical books would give an unemployed philosopher's book a careful and open-minded look gives me reason to hope that this profession isn't all about pedigree and prestige, and that good work, no matter who produces it, will eventually be recognized and rewarded. Am I being pollyannaish? Anyway, I'd be interested in hearing more about Olson's story, if anybody knows anything. Eric?

Making it off the TT

One measure of professional success is one's academic rank and the prestige of one's institution and department: you know you've made it if you're a full professor at MIT. Another measure is the quality and impact of one's work: you know you've made it if you have publications in Nous, Phil Review, and Mind that lots of other philosophers are discussing. It's very rare to find somebody who scores very high on the second measure but very low on the first: there aren't a lot of adjuncts with articles in Nous that everybody is talking about. One reason for this, of course, is that somebody capable of writing really good, "buzzworthy" articles would likely appeal to search committees and would end up with a TT job at a good place. Another reason is that even if you are a brilliant adjunct, teaching 4-4 (or worse) and possibly supplementing your income with another job leaves you very little time in which to produce high quality work. But there are at least possible cases in which these factors are absent: imagine an adjunct who is independently wealthy and has a 2-2 teaching load in a good department, but because she needs to care for an ailing mother or whatever, cannot relocate to a better job. Supposing that our adjunct is really brilliant, would it be possible for her to become a significant figure in her field, all the while remaining an adjunct? Or is it just impossible to get taken seriously if you don't have a "real" job?

Practical philosophy

An email announcing the founding of a new philosophy radio show and institute associated with the University of North Dakota (details here) makes the following claim:

We at IPPL are committed to the belief that all philosophical research is relevant to day to day life (even the most obscure stuff) and that what is needed is a “translation” of the technical or jargon-filled work. General audiences will respond to what we do, we just have to get their attention.

No doubt there are certain bits and pieces of philosophy that might be of some use or interest to the man on the Clapham omnibus, but this strikes me as an outrageous exaggeration. You?