October 23, 1999
Dear Prof. Swartz,
I liked your bloodlust article.
Two points: (1.) I echo some of the others in saying that the bloodlust
is not as widespread as your article might make it seem, but that it does
flare up awfully at times, including, to my shame, in myself. But an
excuse for a small bit of it is (2.) Sometimes philosophers either (a.)
clog the journals with lines that wishfully ignore obvious premises which
falsify their position; or (b.) advocate extreme epistemological nihilism
(usually for wishful political reasons) in a way which damages standards of
rigor in teaching and research. Here a raised voice is in order, because
the speaker/writer is doing something wrong. Yet, one should raise the
voice only if one is sure that the speaker/writer is indeed guilty of such
intellectual dishonesty (the wishful thinking or the political thinking).
If you think the speaker has simply made an error, and not wished or
politically compelled him or herself into the thesis, then you should be
gentle in pointing out the error.
There are values which, when they are violated, merit a rousing
defense. Am I wrong?
You may post this letter if you like.
Jim Ryan
Huron College, Univ. of Western Ontario
email: jaryan@iprimus.ca
|