Saturday, April 16, 2011

JFP 190 Cancelled

As you probably expected.... From the APA:
The Jobs for Philosophers 190 print issue has been cancelled due to the low number of job ads received for that issue. The JFP 190W will be published online on May 6 as scheduled.


Glaucon said...

Rudie can't fail, Charlie don't surf, and Julie's been working with the drug squad. What's a boy to do?

Anonymous said...

I need a job. The chances of being entirely unemployed in the fall look pretty promising right now. I might have to call myself an "independent scholar" or something. F&%k.

Anonymous said...

McDonalds is going on a hiring binge- great timing!

Anonymous said...

Do 'independent scholar' and 'fry cook' have to go on separate lines on a CV? Or can I have 'independent scholar/fry cook' as one entry?

Anonymous said...

This really shouldn't come as a surprise, and I think reflects a very disturbing trend in Philosophy.

I believe that one reason why there are fewer and fewer jobs is that Philosophy - from what I can see - is, as a field, doing a terrible job of making itself relevant. Perhaps, in a perfect world, we could all be funded to study and teach our esoteric pieces of pretty, but that's not the world we live in. And especially at small colleges (like mine), Philosophy Programs need to be savvy about making themselves relevant.

For instance, we here created a general education category that many of classes fulfill, and while other departments can fulfill it, none do it as often (or as well) as we do. It's tough for the university to cut lines, or not replace retiring faculty, when we are required to run a certain number of gen-ed sections. Also, sharing one's work and working with other programs help to fill seats, which helps to keep tenure lines open. Joint discussions, presentations, or workshops on campus go a long way. So when one colleague gives a workshop on "Workplace Ethics" with faculty from business, that colleague helps to sell her Ethics courses to non-liberal arts students. Same thing with our colleague who did a workshop with some science faculty on the history of ideas (with a focus on the sciences). Getting Philosophy faculty out of the classroom and into the wider campus community, working with other departments, can help drum up business, which is one way of saving lines.

While it sucks to have to market one's field, it's how administration thinks. It's easy to cut lines from a department that can't fill it's courses. It's much harder to cut one that does, or that works in tandem with other departments.

Anonymous said...

This is the third year in a row, is it not?

Anonymous said...

@ Anonymous 4:57 PM

I agree. We need to make it more relevant. The buzz needs to happen off campus too, I think.

Something like this maybe? Also?



Anonymous said...


way too serious of a post for this blog (but I wholeheartedly agree with you).

New classes on the philosophy of _______. (porn, wall street, war, draconian drug laws, the drug war, imbeciles in Washington, congress as a circus, etc) we need to be more relevant to today's widely debated topics!

Anonymous said...

4:57 hits the nail on the fucking head.

It's probably too late for anything to be done. Most philosophers are way too elitist to give a shit (or understand the importance of) good PR. They also tend to be assholes, which doesn't help.

This attitude probably isn't unrelated to the fact that most philosophers don't come from low-income backgrounds. Just sayin...

Anonymous said...

4:57 here:

"It's probably too late for anything to be done. Most philosophers are way too elitist to give a shit (or understand the importance of) good PR. They also tend to be assholes, which doesn't help."

Two things here. First, philosophers are also people, which means that some of them will be elitist, petty, and thoughtless. But certainly not all (or at least not all the time). Second, and more importantly, too many people in philosophy seem to hold that academic value lies in "the masses" not understanding something. When "the masses" get hold of it, it's no longer a valuable intellectual pursuit. This is not true of all, but enough that it becomes a problem. It has become such a problem that even when smart, well-written, and intellectually rigorous work gets published for a general audience (instead of for a specialized audience), that work is deemed inferior. "If it's any good," some will ask, "why not publish it in the most appropriate academic journal?" In short, too many in philosophy see only other philosophers as worthy readers of their work, even when that work can be addressed (and may even be of interest to) a more general audience.

This problem isn't limited to philosophy, but I think other fields (from what I can tell) are more open to publishing for general audiences. My colleagues in literature, sociology, history, and one colleague in geology, have all been lauded for their publications that reach a general audience (and not just by the university, but by their peers in the field).

santa said...

@ anon 4:57: It's the thing that I have derided that I call the philosopher's academic reach around.

At least if there was more public philosophical takedowns like Spiros seems to do, it would make philosophy seem more relevant to the masses, like judo for the mind. Think like pro wrestling or O'Reilly Report debates for the logically coherent.

Right now Philosophy as a discipline comes off as a bunch of intellectuals in the ivory tower debating shit that few in the general public give a fuck about.

verify: batir said...

Thank you for the article, very useful piece of writing.