Map of PhilPapers (Simple): Based on Detailed Map of Philosophy data. OpenOrd's modularity measure was used to determine group membership. Groups were then treated as individual nodes, and I gave a general characterization of the topics found in each group. Node size = number of topics within that group, and edge width = number of between-group citations.
Map of PhilPapers (Detailed): This is intended as a representation of the relations between philosophical topics. The raw data was PhilPapers' categorization of 272,719 articles into 3,229 categories. Initial edges = article-category. Edges were folded to connect categories directly (A-B-C -> A-C, where A & C are categories and B is an article categorized under both). Edge weight, width, and color are based on the number of articles co-categorized. Edges with edge weight <10 were cut to reduce graph density.
SEP Articles & Topics: Using data from Eric Schwitzgebel from the SEP, edge A-B = Author A was cited in Article B. Top 100 authors (by PageRank) and 200 articles (by in-degree) represented. Author colors reflect PageRank (high to low: red, purple, blue, black). I find it striking how few nodes & edges there are for non-Western, continental, history, and even value theory.
Sociology of Philosophies: From Randall Collins The Sociology of Philosophies. Nodes derived from Collins' index of subjects. Edge A-B = A and B appear on the same page. Edge weight = frequency of co-occurrence. Node size based on weighted degree. Label colors reflect group membership, as defined by modularity measure. You'll notice geography-based clusters on the periphery, with topics discussed by philosophers around the world at the center of the network.
Co-citations in Ontology: Based on 140,000 citations of 4,700 articles from PhilPapers' Objects, Ontology, Persons, and Realism/Anti-Realism categories. Citations filtered to only include co-citation (A cited B, and B cited A), resulting in 1,770 citations between 377 philosophers. Red = highest PageRank, then Bright Blue / Navy Blue / Black in descending order. Edge width is based on the number of citations (lowest # between the two).
PhilJobs AOS Relations: Based on AOS/AOC data from PhilJobs over the last 12 months, treating co-occurrence of AOS/AOC labels as edges in the network. AOS/AOCs were cleaned to group similar items together (e.g., bioethics & medical ethics merged into biomedical ethics). Node size reflects term frequency. Edge width reflects frequency of co-occurrence.
PhilSurvey Correlations: Based on Bourget & Chalmers' survey of professional philosophers. Correlation coefficients were calculated for each pair of survey answers. For those correlations where p<.01, an edge was created between the two survey answers, either positive (green) or negative (pink).
PhilSurvey Philosopher Similarities: For those philosophers who have taken Bourget & Chalmers' survey of philosophers, and made their views public, I created edges between philosophers A and B just in case A and B's reported views were >80% similar. Colors represent group membership. Philosophers that I take to be most important have been labeled.
Minorities in Philosophy: Based on the UP Directory of minorities in philosophy (N=860), this graph shows the frequency and relations between minority categories. Node size = number of philosophers identifying with this group, and edge width and color are based on the number of philosophers who identify with two groups. Notable upshots: far more LGBTQ women than men, the number of men and women is approximately equal among racial minority groups, there are more women with disabilities than men, and Anglophone countries have a smaller percentage of minorities. But, take this with a grain of salt, as we don't know to what extent the directory represents philosophy.
My Dissertation: A mapping of the authors I cite in my dissertation. Edges = me citing authors together. Node size/color based on how often I cite each author.
About Me >