Excerpt from a Memo to SNEC (typos fixed, mentions Earlham)

[SNEC = Synergeticists of the Northeast Corridor ]

Because I went to a fancy school (Princeton) and studied philosophy, I'm used to such as Dr. Walter Kaufman suggesting that "university philosophy" was a subject with zero backbone, a spineless trajectory for dweebs.  That was a challenge to us of course, to make it be otherwise. We were the new generation. He told me directly in his office he thought I was best of breed, in terms of my writing.

Wittgenstein too begged his best students to get out of philosophy. He walked his own talk in that regard, serving as a hermit, school teacher, hospital orderly, medical researcher... anything to escape the "influenza zone" of academic philosophers (what he called it).

Anyway, I heard those around me planning to become philosophy professors talking about the "real world" in distant terms, adding to my resolve to get off that boat.  I dove in to high school teaching after that, and to this day work with the pre-college age crowd.

My early triumph in the early days of the Web was getting Dr. Suber of Earlham College, then maintaining an index of all philosophy websites, to include mine.  He needed convincing that Synergetics was indeed a philosophy, which partly accounts for the quote at the top of my Synergetics on the Web home page.  That convinced him:


If anyone in the world of academic philosophy can only find the Derek Kelly paper as "what philosophy has to say" about Fuller and can't recognize that I'm just as qualified (infinitely more so) to have my views, then that just adds to my perception that academic philosophy is a corrupt joke of a department and, like neoclassical economics, is likely not long for this world. If the issue is I am not a Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) the way they sell it, then that'd be a problem for Philosophical Quarterly as well.  Fuller is just not one of the people they write about, as proved by their sorry track record. How deeply unethical and unprofessional.

It says an awful lot about academic philosophy that the only assessment it managed to cough up was in some obscure journal in 1982. Why should I have any respect whatsoever for such a dead end loser discipline?  I'd rather use their negligence as evidence of their incompetence and poorly tuned sense of relevance.  I have zero respect for Philosophical Quarterly and would not want to be an author in its pages.


Views: 92


You need to be a member of QuakerQuaker to add comments!

Join QuakerQuaker

Support Us

Did you know that QuakerQuaker is 100% reader supported? If you think this kind of outreach and conversation is important, please support it with a monthly subscription or one-time gift.

You can also make a one-time donation.

Latest Activity

Robert Kirchner posted a discussion

Looking for a reference

There's a story I once came across about an early Friend, and I can't remember which one, or where…See More
12 hours ago
Keith Saylor posted a blog post

The Impulse of Immanent Being

There is a way of being, consciousness, or self-awareness that is innate in human beings and which…See More
4th day (Wed)
Noah Merrill updated their profile
8th month 17
Kirby Urner posted a video

A Pensive Cowboy

Another American sounding off on various issues. Stetson hat.
8th month 17
Anne Marie Hutchinson shared Mike Shell's discussion on Facebook
8th month 15
Paulette Meier updated their profile
8th month 13
Paulette Meier liked Anne Marie Hutchinson's blog post A Japanese Filmmaker’s Perspective on Filming a Quaker Blessing for the Urakami Cathedral Cross
8th month 13
Mike Shell replied to Mike Shell's discussion 'Facing hostile nationalism: Quakers in Nazi Germany and now'
"Thanks for the question, Keith. Yes, I wrote these words, though they were approved by the other…"
8th month 12

© 2019   Created by QuakerQuaker.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service