•  15
    What is the level of John Rawls? There is a problem I have, which may be from my specific perspective. I have written a lot on John Rawls and Milan Kundera, and they seem to belong to the same class, especially they get past certain kinds of checks. If you raise a concern, you are more or less ignored by the many fans/admirers. "This definition doesn't work." Goes back to Kundera/Rawls. But here is the problem: Milan Kundera is not respected like Rawls is. If I were forced to get involved in ran…Read more
  •  24
    (This is a bit mad perhaps, but should I delete it?) A dialogue. Cartesian: that was not a hypothesis about the Sorbonne. You had a clear and distinct idea. God is not a deceiver. So that is the truth. Me: Are you insane? I know hardly anything about the Sorbonne. It's a hypothesis. Cartesian: I'm not insane. That is the proper scientific method of interpretation. Don't be a coward. Me: I'll be taken to hospital and given heavy drugs. These B-plussers would mess with the recipe for KFC. Cartesia…Read more
  •  559
    Do you remember the UCU report on the University of Manchester’s (now risible) project to break into the top 20 “soon”? It said that where we are (35), it is hard to even move one up the rankings. The next year the Sorbonne jumped four up. They were very close to us. That was strange. What is the Sorbonne’s perspective on Oxford and Harvard? This is my hypothesis. “If you care about the arts, you cannot play the ranking game well, because you have to make yourself transparent to outsiders with b…Read more
  •  402
    While Nancy Rothwell was vice-chancellor, the University of Manchester climbed steadily up the Shanghai global rankings to 35. But there was widespread student discontent with Nancy Rothwell. Now the university languishes at 52. That gives rise to a paradox, which starts with these propositions. (A) The students are right to oppose Nancy Rothwell. (B) The university did much better in the global rankings when Rothwell was manager. (C) The best explanation for its earlier success is that Rothwell…Read more
  •  453
    Do philosophers need to be clever? Let us use a simplified model. There are two kinds of people: clever and stupid. The clever are few and the stupid are many. Philosophy is done only by clever people. Then one day someone wants to expand the discipline, so that stupid people can also contribute. They introduce training for stupid people and stupid philosophers arise. But now there are lots of philosophers. It is impossible to keep track of all the research in one’s specialism. So how does one w…Read more
  •  470
    If you are the only black or brown person in a white man’s department, you should do “crazy stuff.” The reason why is because it is likely that there was a black or brown person before you and they were clever like you and they did sensible stuff and they failed. So a sensible approach is probably a failed strategy. Try another strategy, one that seems crazy even.
  •  1988
    In this paper, I present a challenge to Adam Smith’s specialization recommendations, at least according to the “unzany” interpretation suggested by his famous pin factory example. I present it while attempting the style of a notable fiction writer from the Indian sub-continent, as befits the challenge. I have adapted the style slightly for the Western setting.
  •  274
    In this very brief paper, I propose that a solution to a certain unjustness is to meddle with other people's families.
  •  2209
    This document briefly summarizes several objections to Thomas Kuhn on science, including by Feyerabend, Davidson, and Fodor.
  •  131
    This paper reconstructs the argument that Raymond Tallis objects to and presents what I take to be quite an obvious response.
  •  199
    This paper uses Douglas L. Kriner's work on presidential unilateral action to develop an example challenging the conception of a law as an instruction, or order, from the state involving a punishment by the state if it is not followed: a fine, imprisonment, community service, etc.
  •  231
    A worry that was once raised about anthropology at home is that the anthropologist will end up producing a report that is uninformative. In this paper, I draw a parallel between this worry and the paradox of analysis, from the analytic tradition of philosophy. I reveal that a solution to the latter would also address the former.
  •  152
    A poem by Laura Riding provides a counterexample to Jacques Derrida's claim that speech has been privileged over writing.
  •  156
    Andrei Marmor’s premise-by-premise reconstruction omits a premise, which I draw attention to and contest.
  •  163
    This is a brief summary of 22 (!) well-known objections to utilitarianism.
  •  570
    Are these two views about new reproductive technologies contradictory?
    IJRDO Journal of Social Science and Humanities Research 10 (3): 2-3. 2024.
    This paper responds to two seemingly contradictory views that Jeanette Edwards identifies in an article on the impact of new reproductive technologies in the northwest of England. I argue that they are probably not contradictory. But I do so by modifying how the views are formulated and reflect on the significance of this for anthropology at home.
  •  499
    In this paper, I present a way in which John Rawls’s original position thought experiment can be brought closer to nationalism. The social science laws can be taken from a nation’s heritage.
  •  204
    This document summarizes Robert Nozick's objections to John Rawls in chapter 7, part 2, of Anarchy, State and Utopia. A number of other objections apart from the most well-known ones are identified.
  •  216
    This document summarizes ten objections to John Rawls's difference principle. The objections are less well-known ones.
  •  192
    This paper responds to Margaret Masterman’s legendary “The Nature of a Paradigm,” which aims to identify 21 different uses of “paradigm” in Thomas Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. I propose that he should have used, or at least introduced, the term in another sense or attempted sense, absent from her list, and explain why.
  •  699
    This is a one page handout reconstructing the paradox and identifying four solutions in the literature, as well as some concerns about them.
  •  714
    This paper contests a point that Jacques Derrida and John Searle actually agree on, within their infamous debate: that a sign must be repeatable. I focus on a situation involving dissent when evaluating this claim.
  •  1431
    This document gathers together, in summary form, objections scattered across many papers and multiple online databases. Nevertheless, it omits some objections, notably complicated ones. (NOTE: please go to view version history, if you have problems downloading.)
  •  699
    A brief handout summarizing Andrew Lang's criticisms of Frazer.
  •  969
    This is a handout identifying twenty objections that have been made to the reflective equilibrium method.
  •  93
    This paper argues for the significance of kinship because of government policies to deal with declining populations.
  •  674
    I raise a worry that Shashi Tharoor’s criticism that “much of Narayan’s prose reads like a translation” is inconsistent with his criticism “the ABC of bad writing – archaisms, banalities and cliches – abounded” because these things tend to be worded in a way that exploits local linguistic features, such as alliteration, making translation difficult. I also flag another inconsistency worry, but earlier in this paper.