Shared by Andrew Cullison

Don't agree...but it's an interesting thought worth considering
Over at the Feminist Philosophers blog, someone asked: "If there were one or two things you could change about academia, what would it be?" A heartening answer (from my point of view at least) given by several commenters: grading!Some choice comments and observations below the fold:

pdiv lang="en"a name="Abs1"/aspanAbstract  /spandivFew philosophers believe that G. E. Moore’s notorious proof of an external world can give us justification to believe that
skepticism about perceptual beliefs is false.

A young philosopher writes: I'm an untenured faculty member at [a PhD-granting department], and I'm writing because I think something needs to be done about the state of philosophy journals lately. I am powerless to do anything, but maybe if...Brian Leiter

Here’s the current draft of my little tiny paper urging caution on this point. Comments very welcome, of course.

...is out now.  Here's the table of contents:The Role of Intuitions in PhilosophyDaniel Cohnitz, Sören Häggqvist     1-14Intuitions in Epistemology: Towards a Naturalistic AlternativeKristoffer Ahlstrom     15-34If Intuitions Must Be Evidential then Philosophy is in Big TroubleJoshua Earlenbaugh, Bernard Molyneux     35-53Philosophical IntuitionsMark Fedyk     54-80

Inside Higher Ed's Rob Weir usually offers sage advice on all matters pedagogical. A few months back, Rob tackled an age old teaching problem: students who don't read. Rob notes that there probably never was a Golden Age of Student Literacy, a halcyon era when students would gladly forego doing the Charleston/hitting the drive-in/scoping out Facebook for the opportunity to read assigned academic material.

Those of you who bother reading book contracts probably have noticed that most Presses have in their standard contracts a clause which gives them the right to publish your next book if they want to. This sometimes get written as an agreement to the effect that the Press gets to look at your next project first, and you can approach another publisher only if they're not interested in it.

I can’t see how the data collected is related to the question in the title of this link. The statistics tells us (I think) something about the number of philosophers who claim a specialization in philosophy of religion and who occupy a position in a Ph.D. granting institution. There is data here, too. But what does that have to do with whether or not philosophy of religion is taken seriously?

A good discussion about evidence, inference and what it means to have good evidence, bad evidence, and no evidence. Also, the merit of two views about the nature of evidence is discussed: the always-factive view vs. the sometimes-non-factive view.

via Leiter