23AR28-24

( - previous issue - / - next issue - )

pdf = www.bit.ly/44kvB4C

AR 28:24 - The Lost World of the 21st Century

In this issue:

GENDER - MIT philosophy professor argues for the "need to tolerate those with sacrilegious answers"

SATANISM - "The Satanic Temple does not believe in Satan"

Apologia Report 28:24 (1,621)
July 11, 2023

GENDER

"Philosophy's No-Go Zone: An MIT professor describes the outraged reaction from fellow philosophers when he argued that a woman is an adult human female" by Alex Byrne (Quillette, Apr 17 '23) -- in good, lengthy humor, Byrne opens by explaining that Rene Descartes' Meditations has long be a "staple of Philosophy 101 [in that it presents] the ethos of philosophy - question claims that we ordinarily take for granted and can't imagine denying. Nothing is off the table. Weak-minded scientists may conform their conclusions to the prevailing orthodoxy, but at least clear-eyed philosophers will remain unbowed."

   Byrne then identifies two examples of how heresies have invaded his honored discipline over "transgender issues." As he sees it, such conflicts "aren't particularly frequent, which gives the impression that academic life chugs along as it should for long periods between outbreaks of intolerance. This essay is about why that impression is wrong. A kind of philosophical cold war prevails during peacetime, stifling debate and memory-holing inconvenient views. ...

   "I began to take a serious interest in the philosophy of sex and gender in 2018, though it is a topic that is usually pursued by those working in feminist philosophy. ... Take, for example, the question, What is a woman? That isn't just the title of conservative provocateur Matt Walsh's 2022 <www.bit.ly/3JQewY5> documentary. It's a question asked by Simone de Beauvoir in her feminist classic, The Second Sex, more than 70 years ago. ...

   "A woman, Matt Walsh's wife Alissa says at the end of the film, is an adult human female. The joke is that the people Walsh interviews are unable to give this obvious answer." Then Byrne reports: "I was surprised to learn that most feminist philosophers are also convinced that Mrs. Walsh is wrong. ... A philosophy paper defending the view that to be a woman is to be an adult human female was begging to be written, and so I wrote one." What follows is a chronicle of the fallout he experienced.

   "I received bizarre reports from referees, including one that said my paper was 'inadequate' and 'ill-informed,' without mentioning anything I had written or argued. (Referee reports are not supposed to be like this.) Eventually - perhaps because there were no more hostile referees left to review the paper - it was published in a good generalist journal, Philosophical Studies. ...

   "I gave six different arguments for the hypothesis that women are adult human females.... One of my arguments is that the hypothesis that women are adult human females (AHF) correctly predicts the outcome in cases of 'gender role reversal.' ...

   "A philosopher at Yale, Robin Dembroff, swiftly wrote a reply to my article, which also appeared in Philosophical Studies. Even by the pugilistic standards of philosophy, the frenzy of punches was magnificent." Byrne includes a portion.

   "I wrote a reply to Dembroff, which Philosophical Studies rejected. The Journal of Controversial Ideas arrived to save me. It had recently been started by (among others) the philosopher Peter Singer <www.bit.ly/3NwOqKn> and my reply appeared in the first issue, in 2021. (I had a subsequent productive exchange with a pseudonymous philosopher in that journal, which modeled how these debates can be conducted professionally.) ...

   "I envisaged a kind of Steven-Pinkerish book - serious writing for a popular educated audience, but with something to interest specialists, and plenty of references and notes for those wishing to dive deeper. ...

   "Meanwhile, Holly Lawford-Smith, a philosopher at the University of Melbourne in Australia (and now a Quillette columnist), was completing her own book ... Gender-Critical Feminism. Unlike me, Lawford-Smith has plunged headfirst into transgender-related political and social controversies, racking up an impressive list of deplatformings and protests. When I learned that Lawford-Smith was battling with OUP over revisions, I felt a little alarmed for my own book. Lawford-Smith's use of 'male' was apparently problematic, and OUP even objected to a sentence alleging that a leading feminist philosopher had made a 'mistake.' (Philosophers accuse their colleagues of much more than 'mistakes' in the pages of Oxford University Press books!) ...

   "Worse for Lawford-Smith was to come. By July, her book manuscript had already been reviewed and revised, and was now in production, at the copyediting stage. Normally authors relax at this point, since all the main hoops have been jumped through. However, OUP decided to halt the process, so that the (single) chapter on transgender issues could be reviewed by a 'neutral medical expert' - an 'expert' who turned out to be far from neutral. ...

   "[W]hile beavering away on Trouble with Gender, I received an invitation to contribute a chapter on pronouns for the Oxford Handbook of Applied Philosophy of Language. ...

   "There are more than 1,000 Oxford Handbooks (published by OUP), including the intriguingly titled Oxford Handbook of Superdiversity, mostly bought by libraries. (Superdiversity will set you back $175 in hardcover.) An invited handbook chapter on one's CV is not as valuable as a peer-reviewed paper in a journal, but academics accept these invitations because publication is practically guaranteed. ...

   "As I worked on the chapter, I realized that the topic was richer than I had initially thought. ... I addressed the feasibility of reforming English by adding an 'epicene' third-person singular pronoun suitable for anyone, a proposal that has been intermittently and fruitlessly made since the 19th century. The Swedes tried it with hen, with limited success." His included example constitutes a useful overview of the technicalities involved.

   "While waiting for a verdict on the pronouns chapter, I continued to work on my book, and submitted a draft, totalling just over 100,000 words, to OUP in April 2022."

   Meanwhile, "The imminent publication of Holly Lawford-Smith's Gender-Critical Feminism was announced that same month, and almost immediately no less than two petitions of complaint appeared, one from the OUP USA Guild (the union representing the New York staff of OUP), and the other from 'members of the international scholarly community' with some connection to OUP. ...

   "OUP stood firm, reaffirming its 'commitment to publishing a breadth of views and perspectives to inspire academic debate.' Good for them - although it is hard to see how any other action could have been in their interests, given that the book was then being printed. Gender-Critical Feminism became available in May 2022; mysteriously, the book (unlike every other comparable work in feminist philosophy published by OUP) has never appeared in electronic form on Oxford Scholarship Online.

   "In June 2022, I heard back from the editors of the Handbook of Applied Philosophy of Language. My chapter would not be appearing in it after all; no revisions allowed. ... Subsequently, a replacement chapter on pronouns was commissioned. ...

   "The conclusions of the new chapter were congenial to the prevailing ideology in feminist philosophy. 'He' for Elliot Page is not a simple courtesy, but just as correct as 'he' for Arnold Schwarzenegger. ...

   "A couple of weeks later, I heard that OUP would not be publishing Trouble with Gender either, for the sole reason that 'the book does not treat the subject in a sufficiently serious and respectful way.' ... Beaten down by the hours I had wasted trying to resolve issues with my handbook contribution, I offered no resistance. OUP clearly did not want to publish the book under any circumstances. ...

   "Is there anything left to cancel? Yes! Lawford-Smith had another book in the works, Sex Matters, a collection of essays on gender-critical feminism, which OUP had kept under review for more than a year. ... Had OUP been spooked...? It's hard to know for sure - it's also hard to avoid speculating. ...

   "From my experience publishing in this particular area of philosophy, this lack of engagement was par for the course. In fact, I found the reviewer's hyperbolic report reassuring: if I had made mistakes, at least they were not easy to identify. ...

   "Polity, a well-regarded academic press in the UK, agreed to take the book on. ...

   "And although chapters for handbooks are rarely suitable for academic journals, the Journal of Controversial Ideas came to my rescue once again, and 'Pronoun Problems' will appear in the next issue, around the end of April. ...

   "What is disturbing about this affair is that it illustrates how a small vocal clique can bend an academic discipline to its will, relying on the unwillingness of the majority to push back. ... Brazen unprofessionalism is permitted, even encouraged - provided it's from those with the 'correct' opinions. Junior academics and graduate students soon learn what they are not allowed to say."

   Nearing his conclusion, Byrne opines that "philosophers are keen on promoting 'public philosophy,' bringing the subject to the great unwashed. The discussion of sex and gender should have been philosophy's finest hour, with our profession contributing to the wider conversation, airing its disagreements for all to see. ...

   "Philosophers (and publishers) need to tolerate those with sacrilegious answers." <www.bit.ly/3JYD4hF>

 ---

SATANISM

Just in case you missed the "largest satanic gathering in history" which, in addition to being "sold out," ran under the ironically appropriate name "SatanCon," what follows will give you a taste of the April 30th event. "The Salem-based Satanic Temple is celebrating its 10th anniversary.... and will include satanic rituals, entertainment, discussion panels, a 'satanic marketplace' and a satanic wedding chapel, according to organizers. ...

   "The Satanic Temple and its members don't view Satan as an evil figure, but as one who dared question authority. [One imagines the response of Alex Byrne, above.] The group, which opened its headquarters in Salem in 2016, mostly advocates for the separation of church and state" and a growing number of non-conservative interests.

   "Founders Lucien Greaves and Malcolm Jerry will also hold sessions that include a retrospective on the organization and lectures on topics like 'Reclaiming the Trans Body,' 'Deconstructing Your Religious Upbringing' and 'Satanism and the BIPOC Experience.'

   "While the organization uses satanic imagery, it is non-theistic and uses Satan as a symbol of its skepticism of Christianity as a culturally dominant religion, according to the organization. ...

   "It adds: 'The Satanic Temple does not believe in Satan, does not accept souls, and is not to be confused with other satanic religions.'" MassLIve, Apr 24 '23, <www.bit.ly/3XsDzWJ>

   For a post-SatanCon response, see <www.bit.ly/46lob2e> 

   This Roman Catholic overview of satanism in France invites us to imagine the popular prediction: "As goes Europe, so goes America, eventually." <www.bit.ly/3JP14Ug>

   POSTSCRIPT, Jul 17 '23: Reminds one of how "just a little yeast will spread through the whole lump of bread dough."

( - previous issue - / - next issue - )