Fighting the British Boycott of Israel

Since I am on a little kick here of defending Israel, I thought I'd mention the following.

The ADL has started a campaign against the efforts for the British Journalist and Academic boycott of Israel. In addition to a letter that you can sign (click here to sign the letter), they are running a series of anti-boycott ads. Click here to see a PDF version of one of their print ads. The basic gist of the ads is that to single out Israel for a boycott while ignoring brutal and ruthless regimes like Iran or Sudan is a form of antisemitism.

Criticism of Israel can be an important part of social and political discourse, but it is the failure to appreciate the context that is the antisemitism. Israel is a democratic country that values freedom, individual rights, and religious pluralism. It often fails to meets its own ideal, but at least it has these ideals, unlike Iran, Sudan, and countless other countries where differences are not tolerated, rights are not recognized let alone respected, and where the very work that journalists and academics engage in can land you in jail or worse.

The moral inversion of singling out Israel and not countries that are by far and away much worse is why this boycott is rightly called antisemitic.

A related anti-boycott page: An Open Letter to the People Known as Members of Britain's University and College Union

Don't let facts get in the way

Sunday's Arizona Republic printed a viewpoint article, "Questions remain over 1967 attack on U.S. intelligence ship 'Liberty'". The author, Mark Genrich, leaves out many facts in this near-slanderous piece. I submitted a letter to the editor which I've posted below:

To the Editor:

With all due respect to the servicemen on the USS Liberty, the tale of an Israeli intentional attack is preposterous. Contrary to Mr. Genrich’s viewpoint article (June 3, 2007), there have been a number of official U.S. investigations, including the US Navy Court of Inquiry and House Armed Services Committee, concluding that this was a tragic mistake. No reason is ever given by these conspiracy theorists for why Israel would intentional attack an American ship.

At the time, the U.S. announced that it had no vessels within a hundred miles of the coast and the USS Liberty was directed not to approach within a hundred miles. Nonetheless, likely because of communication failures, the USS Liberty was attacked fourteen miles from the coast. Israeli forces had reported being shelled from the sea and had concluded that this unidentified ship was responsible. Once the Israelis released this was an American ship, they immediately apologized to American officials both in Israel and in the Washington. Also not mentioned in the article is the fact that Israel quickly and willingly paid reparations to the US and the families of the victims.

Sincerely,
Shawn Klein

For more information on the Liberty:
The Jewish Library's Myth and Facts article on the Liberty.
Michael Oren's excellent account of the 1967 war, Six Days of War, provides a detailed account of the incident.

Update: Letter published!

Lipstick Jihad

The Israeli journal, Azure, has an interesting review of two books on Iranian youth culture: Lipstick Jihad: A Memoir of Growing Up Iranian in America and American in Iran by Azadeh Moaveni and Warring Souls: Youth, Media, and Martyrdom in Post-Revolution Iran by Roxanne Varzi. Each of these books, according to the review, provide insight into the complexity and paradoxes of the Iranian youths. Iran, ruled by a click of dictatorial theocrats, is largely inhabited by disaffected and alienated young men and women who want nothing more than to drink alcohol, have sex, and listen to rock music.

The hopeful elements presented in these books are that the youth appear to want liberty and to dislike the authoritarian regime. This holds the promise of new Iranian revolution that could oust the current repressive and dangerous regime. Whether this can happen before Iran must be bombed to prevent it from going nuclear is an important question.

A most disheartening element,however, appears in the review. According to one of the authors reviewed, Varzi, there is a deeply ingrained reliance on authority and little individualism. She describes how even in simple social activities like a ski trip or party, there was "nothing that was done spontaneously or from individual initiative. The group was always consulted; everyone participated once the activity was decided on, and there was always somehow a de facto leader (chosen usually for age and experience) whom everyone deferred to." This is hardly promising. Even if a revolution could occur, it could very well usher in just a different authoritarianism. Nonetheless a more secular authoritarianism might be preferable to the maniacal, death-obsessed Islamic authoritarianism already in power.

The review has piqued my interest enough to add these to my amazon wish list.

Who Needs Philosophy?

As I will soon be losing my web site at MCC, it was time to start up a new website for my classes. To that end, I've started www.whoneedsphilosophy.com. This site is for my students to find out more information about their classes, their instructor, and philosophy in general. Others are welcome to peruse the site as well.

The Evil Competition: Nazis and Communists

Stephen Browne has an interesting post , distributed as a column by The Atlasphere, that wonders why Nazis are the epitome of evil while the Soviets and Communist Chinese have body counts that are orders of magnitude larger. Hitler is the ultimate way to call some one evil, but Stalin, Lenin, or Mao are not. This is something that I have wondered myself. I am disgusted by the college students I see wearing t-shirts with Che, Mao, or Lenin on them. Are they just stupid and ignorant or something much worse?

I posted a comment to Stephen Browne's blog along the following lines (I forgot to copy and paste it and the comment is awaiting approval, so I am rewriting from memory).

I wonder if part of the reason that the Nazis are seen as worse, as more evil, than the Soviets, etc., is the systematic, methodical plan to kill entire races of people. The communists had their camps and mass executions, but they generally only murdered their perceived enemies and those that were deemed beyond 'rehabilitation' or 'reeducation'. They didn't target, to my knowledge, people solely because they were Jewish, gay, gypsie, etc.

Another aspect of this is that the Nazis had no qualms about murdering children. They actively targeted and killed children of all ages. (1.5 million Jewish children were murdered by the Nazi's during the Shoah). To my knowledge, the communists usually didn't target children for execution. (not to imply that children weren't murdered by the Soviets/Chinese/etc.)

I think for many people in comparing the Nazis with the Soviets/Chinese/etc. considerations of intentions and goals are trumping the body counts.

Ultimately, both the Nazis and Communists were and are evil. There is a certain point where trying to make distinctions like "more evil" no longer makes sense.

Rockford Bound

I am very pleased to announce that I have been offered and have accepted the job at Rockford College. Rockford is a small, private liberal arts college in Rockford, Illinois. It's about 90 miles NNW of Chicago.

I'll be teaching a 4-4 load from a mix of different classes. The fall slate is Intro to Philosophy and upper-division sections of Ethical Theory and Business Ethics.

[update 5/2/07 4.19pm] Rockford has produced this flyer announcing my hire!

What's Wrong with Contemporary Philosophy?

[cross-listed at SUPHI]

Here's an interesting article that attempts a diagnosis of contemporary philosophy and why it seems not to progress or hold much external sway.

http://ontology.buffalo.edu/smith/articles/What'sWrong.pdf (Hat tip Stephen Hicks)

I am sympathetic to the points made in the article, in particular regarding analytic philosophy. Analytic philosophy has, in its current academic form, largely become irrelevant, esoteric, and insular. What used to be -- and still is billed as such -- the quest for asking and answering "The Big Questions" has become overly concerned with technical terminology and peculiar puzzles.

Can you really imagine Aristotle at the Lyceum worrying about whether it is a logical possibility for a cat to give birth to an elephant? I recall several times thinking in a seminar: "if we resolved this _fill in the blank_ puzzle, definitely and once for all, what difference does it make?"

Scholarly Notes: Gersonides

April's column for Or Adam:

Continuing our tour of early Jewish philosophers, this month we will look at Levi ben Gerson (also known as Ralbag or Gersonides). Born in 1288 in Provence, Gersonides was an important and influential figure in medieval Jewish philosophy. He died in 1344.

Like Philo and Maimonides before him, Gersonides attempts to reconcile Greek philosophy with Jewish theology. Unlike the earlier thinkers, however, Gersonides had robust knowledge of mathematics and astronomy. Norbert Samuelson says of Gersonides: “he could arguably be considered the most important astronomer in Christian Europe before Galileo” (228). He brought this knowledge to bear on his philosophical thinking, giving it an empirical and scientific basis lacking in the earlier synthetic adventures. He criticizes Maimonides for trying to stay neutral on cosmological questions and he argues that astronomy and reason can provide definitive answers.

Heavily influenced by Maimonides and Aristotle, Gersonides sees reason as the ultimate arbiter of truth. He believed that the Torah and reason could not conflict; but where they apparently did, one needed, according to Gersonides, to interpret the Torah in a way compatible with reason. Humans, using their faculty of reason, can gain knowledge and understanding of the universe and there is nothing, according to Gersonides, that is in principle out of reason’s reach.

Like Philo and Maimonides, Gersonides believes in God and the Torah. But their attempts at synthesis are what make these thinkers important for secular humanism. The continual and ruthless injection of reason into attempts at understanding the world paves the way for secular humanism. Gersonides, with his consistent and rigorous rationalism, expands the scope of reason and science in grasping the truths of existence and thus, quite unintentionally, limits the scope of faith and the supernatural.

Sources: The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy and Jewish Philosophy: An Historical Introduction by Norbert Samuelson.

The New Kiekekaard

Cow and Boy is a relatively new strip and has quickly risen to one my favorites. It's got a Calvin & Hobbes feel, but instead of a stuffed tiger, it's a talking cow.

SUPHI: Discussion Question: Origins

Over at Suphi, I posted the following discussion question:

I am often amazed at the different ways that individuals have come to philosophy. Some from a novel or movie, others through religion, many through a philosophy course, and even a few from coming across and reading actual contemporary philosophy on their own.

So I am curious: What inspired your desire to learn more about and study philosophy? Was it a book(s)? What book(s) and why? Did you arrive here from some other path?

My response was:

I was a voracious reader from a young age and novels where my entrance point to philosophy. Some of the earliest novels I read that got me thinking, with hindsight, more philosophically were: Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand, The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger, and Brave New World by Aldous Huxley. I read these first (I’ve read each of these at least three times) between 11-14 years-old. The first reads were, for the most part, over my head. Nonetheless, they started me thinking about the way the world was: the nature of good and evil, the influence and danger of authority and power, and how individuals relate (or fail to) to each other. These are themes I still think about and struggle with to this day.

My freshman year at Tufts, I took an introduction to philosophy class where we read Plato, Descartes, and Quine. (Yes "two dogmas" during my first semester of college!) I hated my teacher, so I got somewhat turned off to academic philosophy and ended up an English major. By my junior year, I had reread all three of the above novels again and my interest in philosophy re-emerged. I took several more philosophy courses and the rest, as they say, is history.

ASU Philosophy Graduate Students

Along with several of my fellow graduate students, I have started up a group blog: ASU Philosophy Graduate Students. It's already got a few interesting posts. I plan on cross-posting to Philosophy Blog my posts. I might repost comments here as well as I see fit.

Scholarly Notes: Milton Friedman

March column for Or Adam:

For this month's column, we move to the present day to look at one of the most influential secular Jewish intellectuals of the 20th century. Milton Friedman was born on July 31, 1912 in Brooklyn, NY to an Orthodox Jewish family. As Friedman recalls, he was fanatic in his preteen years about observing the Jewish laws. He began, however, to question the rational basis for these laws and finding none, rejected religion.

Friedman won the Noble Prize in Economics in 1976. He was also awarded the National Medal of Science and the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1988. His major achievements were in economic theory, but not just in academia. Friedman worked for several federal administrations starting with President Franklin Roosevelt. While working at the Department of Treasury during World War II, Friedman helped to invent the payroll withholding tax system that most of us are all too familiar with and that Friedman would later regret. He was an adviser for several U.S. presidents, including Presidents Nixon and Reagan, as well as British Prime Minister Margret Thatcher. Serving on the Gates Commission--President Nixon's Advisory Commission on an All-Volunteer Force--Friedman was a vigorous and ultimately victorious voice against the military draft. Friedman also was the intellectual force behind school choice, proposing in 1955 a system of school vouchers to introduce competition and choice into education.

Friedman communicated his economic and political ideas to the general public as well. He made a popular series with PBS in 1980 called "Free to Choose" which was later made into a bestselling book by the same name. It was updated in 1990 and is now available for free on the web: http://www.ideachannel.tv/ He wrote a regular column for Newsweek from 1966 until 1983 and gave lectures around the world.

The focus of most of his work was on economics and politics with the goal of creating and spreading more autonomy and freedom throughout the world. Friedman did not speak about god or religion often. From what he does say, it is clear that Friedman viewed the question of god as unanswerable, unverifiable, and ultimately irrelevant. What was important was that individuals had the freedom to choose and live their lives. Milton Friedman died at the age of 94 on November 16, 2006.

Sources: Wikipedia; interview, Academy of Achievement; biography, Cato Institute.

Philo of Alexandria

My second column for the Or Adam newsletter focused on Philo of Alexandria:

Philo Judaeus, better known as Philo of Alexandria, lived from around 20 B.C.E to 50 C.E. in Alexandria, Egypt and is often identified as the first Jewish philosopher. Like Maimonides, who comes a millennium after him, Philo was interested in reconciling Jewish and Greek thought. Unlike Maimonides, Philo is more heavily influenced by Plato and the Stoics rather than Aristotle. Many of Philo's writings on the existence and nature of God, the creation of the world, and the virtues are similar to the doctrines of Platonic and Stoic thought.

Philo's importance to Jewish philosophy is relatively minor. He is not the touchstone or innovator of Jewish thought that Maimonides is. Philo's philosophical view of Judaism was not widely accepted in his lifetime or later. He did, however, have an important, though sometimes disputed, influence on the development of Christianity. There is, according to some scholars, reason to think that he influenced Paul and some other writers of the Gospels.

So in what sense is he a Jewish philosopher? First, the focus of much of his attention is on the biblical ideas; and in particular, on Moses and the foundations of the Law. Second, Philo sought to show that Greek philosophy provided the best means by which to understand Torah and its law.

Philo's importance to secular Judaism is, like many of the Jewish philosophers this column will look at, indirect. Philo had no intention, and would likely be appalled at, rejecting or sidelining God. He is, nonetheless, interesting from a secular humanistic perspective because he was one of the first Jewish thinkers to explicitly use reason and philosophy to grapple with the sacred Jewish texts. By placing reason at the center of his methodology for understanding the world, Philo helps to make possible secular humanism.

Sources: Jewish Philosophy by Norbert Samuelson; A History of Philosophy, Vol 1 by Frederick Copleston; Wikipedia, JewishEncyclopedia.com and The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Save the 911 Memorial

I am not usually one to sign or pass on online petitions. This one, however, seemed worthy of an exception.

Apparently, the latest plan for the World Trade Center Memorial is to list the names randomly, with no discernible order or grouping, and no information about the individuals (such as age). The petition is to change this so that the names are listed so that "the arrangement of names at the WTC Memorial must answer the following questions: What was the victim’s name? How old was he/she? Where did he/she work? Where was he/she on 9/11?"

I don't like the random listing of names, in part because I can see no meaningful purpose in doing so. It serves to dehumanize the individuals murdered that day; as well as making it quite difficult to find a name. There should be some rational ordering of the names that provides context to the individual victims and allows mourners and visitors to easily find the names.

That's why I signed this petition, and why I am passing on to you.
http://www.savethe911memorial.com/petition.html

The Life and Ideas of Milton Friedman

Worth Watching:

Power of Choice: The Life and Ideas of Milton Friedman
Monday, January 29, 2007, 10pm (AZ time) on PBS, Channel 8.

"A documentary on the life and ideas of Nobel-winning economist Milton Friedman (1912-2006), with comments from former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan; economists Gary Becker and Paul Samuelson, and former Estonian prime minister Mart Laar."

Sad News

Some sad news to report. I heard today that Professor Fitch, of the ASU Philosophy Department, passed away this weekend. He had been on leave this semester and last to battle the illness he had, but succumbed on Saturday morning. I never took a course with Prof. Fitch and didn't know him well, but he was very popular among the students (undergrad and grad alike) and was deeply respected by the faculty.

Proper Grad Student Etiquette

For all those who ask this of me regularly:



From PHD Comics. (click on image to see it in full resolution)

Maimonides

I've begun writing a short monthly column for the Or Adam newsletter. Each month, I'll briefly discuss an important thinker in Jewish history or in secular humanist thought. The following was the first "Scholarly Notes" with a focus on Maimonides.

One of the greatest scholars of medieval Jewish history, and arguably of any period, was the Spanish born Moses ben Maimon, better known by his Greek name: Maimonides. Born in Córdoba in 1135, Maimonides eventually settles in Cairo after moving around to escape Muslim persecution and forced conversions of Jews. In Cairo, he rises to prominence as an influential physician and philosopher. He was an expert in Greek philosophy and wrote many secular medical treatises, but his two most famous works are religious in focus: the Mishneh Torah and The Guide to Perplexed. The Mishneh Torah was the Jewish world's first comprehensive law code, integrating laws and rulings from the Tanakh, the Talmuds, Midrashic literature, contemporary rabbinic writings, and even non-Jewish sources like Aristotle. The Guide to the Perplexed seeks to put Jewish law and beliefs on a solid rational basis; that is, he argues that the beliefs were not just the dictates of the Torah or rabbis, but were deduced and proven by reason. In doing so, Maimonides attempts a synthesis of Jewish thinking and Aristotelian philosophy. Although Maimonides' rationalism met much opposition in the Jewish world, many of his views are today taken, at least by the Orthodox, to be defining elements of Judaism. Maimonides also had a profound influence the non-Jewish world. He set the ground for much of later Christian Medieval philosophy: including Thomas Aquinas who attempts, similar to Maimonides' synthesis of Judaism and Aristotelianism, a synthesis of Christianity and Aristotelianism. With Maimonides' attempt to put Jewish thought and beliefs on a rational basis, we should also see him, though quite unintentionally, as setting the stage for later secular Jewish thinking.

Sources: The Teaching Company's Introduction to Judaism by Shai Cherry; A History of the Jews by Paul Johnson; and Wikipedia.

Some changes

In the last month or so, I've started blogging regularly (and simultaneously with Philosophy Blog) at my myspace blog. I've decided that instead of posting the same things on each blog, I want to differentiate the purpose of each. Philosophy Blog will return to its initial purpose: a place for me to blog about philosophically related topics, issues, and questions. All the personal, quirky, silly blogging will go on Myspace Blog, which will also automatically feed into my Facebook profile. There will be occasional crossover blogs, but I will try to keep to this division.

I haven't decided yet if I am going to clean out the non-philosophy related blogs at Philosophy Blog or not. I most likely will keep the older, pre-myspace blogs, but will delete the posts that are duplicated at myspace.

Comic Censorship

My loyal and valued readers will have noticed that I posted a Get Fuzzy comic strip earlier in the week. This strip started a story line of Bucky running for president and sharing his campaign signs with Rob (aka Pinkie) and Satchel. The gag was that Bucky was inadvertently referencing marijuana in his ads. Today's comic, for instance, shows Bucky trying to get the Christian vote with a biblical reference: "Bucky Katt: More Fun than Being Stoned".



I bring this up again because I noticed that the Arizona Republic was running a different set of Get Fuzzy strips. I also spoke to my mother in Boston and the Boston Globe is also not running the Bucky For President story line.

I am outraged at this ridiculous censorship. There is no notice that this strip is different. What else is being censored in the paper without our knowledge? I am going to write the AZ Republic and may even cancel my subscription.