Philosophy and the Case of the Real Thing, Again
Posted on | January 17, 2012
The Journal for the Study of Religions and Ideologies is enthusing about Joe Steiff’s edition of Sherlock Holmes and Philosophy. In fact, the book should be part of the Conan Doyle canon itself. The book
resembles Conan Doyle’s writings in composition, structure, style, form, wit and humor. … The greatest contribution of Josef Steiff’s book is that it brings together philosophy and culture/cultural theories, plus literature/literary theories … to give meanings to 21st century knowledge, life and reality.
The full review is here.
Popmatters.com agrees:
It seems fitting that a book dedicated to Sherlock Holmes should focus on questions, or perhaps a better way of looking at it: many chapters solve their own mini-mysteries.
Catherine Ramsdell gives the book an impressive 7/10. The Times Literary Supplement nods to the book’s explanation of why “the celebrated sleuth is ‘like a good hip-hop song’,” while a reviewer at Amazon.com says the volume contains “far too much useful information to write this book off as merely a Sherlock Holmes companion piece.” Another singles out two essays, one in which Holmes and Watson’s relationship is “masterfully developed . . . in light of Aristotle’s philosophy on friendship” and another which finds “the West’s claim of valuing truth and knowledge stand[ing] in stark contrast to its history of the persecution and murder of heretics.”
Vanity Fairly Correct
Posted on | December 14, 2011
I feel as if the whole culture is stoned, listening to an LP that’s been skipping for decades, playing the same groove over and over. Nobody has the wit or gumption to stand up and lift the stylus.
Kurt Andersen writes in this month’s Vanity Fair what I’ve described here, and here: Popular culture in recent decades has tended to recycle itself and avoid the genuinely new, different, alarming, or exhilarating. Why is this? Andersen thinks it’s “an unconscious collective reaction to all the profound nonstop newness we’re experiencing on the tech and geopolitical and economic fronts. People have a limited capacity to embrace flux and strangeness and dissatisfaction, and right now we’re maxed out.”
But we’re not “maxed out.” Ambitious young artists or writers are killing themselves to cultivate next wave of style or innovation, both to make a name for themselves and to advance the traditions they adore. The problem is that what’s new to them is an album at the Goodwill store from an artist they’ve never heard of, or an obscure film, or a the typeface from an old magazine. They’re surrounded by the commercialism of nostalgia (and here their baby-boomer elders are partly to blame) and unable to pry themselves away from the enchanting, but necessarily unoriginal, cultural buffet of thrift shops, youtube, and archive.org.
How to break out of the nostalgic haze? Who knows? It seems the every institution in America, from risk-averse Hollywood to resume-padding university professors, is more interested in retreading its past than moving on. Andersen has his money on ‘a pendulum swing’ back to values that prize innovation and creativity as they did in the 1940s and late 1960s. But he worries that the malaise may instead be a game changer, something like “that moment when all great cultures—Egyptian, Roman, Mayan, Islamic, French, Ottoman, British—slide irrevocably into an enervated late middle age.”
My hope is that the Occupy Movement will come to the rescue. It just might be that you’d can’t have great popular culture without some kind of resistance and revolt. No The Graduate or Easy Rider without Hey, Hey LBJ, How Many Kids Did You Kill Today? After all, the two circumstances are connected and ripe for mutual inspiration. One reason we are surrounded by nostalgia in music, clothes, and movies is that it sells; and one reason Wall Street had it coming was that it insists on selling anything, including American jobs, natural resources, or bundles of questionable mortgages, that can be sold for a profit. So if the Occupiers inspire a generation of artists and tastemakers and voters to pry themselves away from familiarity and nostalgia, pop culture and American political culture might save themselves, together.
SpongeBob Appointed to Institute for Advance Study
Posted on | November 30, 2011
SpongeBob contemplates the perennial questions
Not really, but the volume of philosophical essays he inspired is getting some good press. The Wisconsin Journal Sentinel loves it, and expects it will be this year’s stocking stuffer.
Inception and Philosophy is out
Posted on | October 17, 2011
Thorsten Botz-Bornstein’s edition Inception and Philosophy: Ideas to Die For is out and available for ebook purchase. Unless I’m dreaming, it looks like there’s even a video for the book.
Planet of the Apes & Philosophy CFA
Posted on | October 14, 2011
PLANET OF THE APES AND PHILOSOPHY: CALL FOR ABSTRACTS
Deadline for abstract submission: January 15, 2012
Editor: John Huss
The editor encourages contributions from philosophers and other intellectuals that explore topics connected to the Planet of the Apes franchise, from Pierre Boulle’s 1963 novel La Planète des singes to the 1968 politically charged blockbuster starring Charlton Heston, through the sequels and TV series to the 2011 reboot/prequel, Rise of the Planet of the Apes. The prequel, which was released at roughly the same time as the documentary Project Nim, has recently received attention from philosophers and animal rights activists, including Peter Singer. Much public discussion of Rise of the Planet of the Apes has centered on ethical and philosophical issues.
Of particular interest for the volume are popular essays addressing current debates in philosophy of biology, philosophy of mind, philosophy of language, animal rights, political philosophy, and environmental ethics. Authors who would like to try their hand at engaging a non-academic audience in philosophical dialogue using the Planet of the Apes films as a touchstone are especially encouraged to submit an abstract.
Email abstracts and a c.v. to: huss.john@gmail.com.
Deadlines: Abstracts due by January 15, 2012; notification of abstract acceptance by February 15, 2012. First drafts due by June 15, 2012; final drafts due by August 15, 2012.
The fine print: Contributors will not be paid in cash, but in copies of the book, worldwide fame and prestige.
Jeopardy! CFA is out
Posted on | September 15, 2011
Shaun Young is circulating a CFA for Jeopardy! and Philosophy. You can find it here. Note: the current deadline is October 17, 2011.
Bullshit & Philosophy translated into Chinese
Posted on | August 15, 2011
Chongquing University Press has just released their Chinese translation of Bullshit and Philosophy: Guaranteed to Get Perfect Results Every Time. I am especially impressed with their cover artwork, reminiscent of Mao’s little red (and white) book.
What is Jeopardy! and Philosophy?
Posted on | July 21, 2011
“This volume, forthcoming in Open Court’s Popular Culture and Philosophy series, will be edited by a philosopher who, unless he or she uses TIVO, never schedules class or office hours between 3:30 and 4:00 pm, central standard time.”
If you are a Jeopardy! fan who recognizes the potential this book could have for discussing many analytic themes—category theory, epistemology, implicit definitions, description theory, artificial intelligence, probability, intelligence measurement, to name a few—to an avid, dedicated, and brainy audience, let me know of your interest and qualifications. Open Court or I will be in touch with prospective editors shortly.
DALEKMANIA in the U.K.
Posted on | April 21, 2011
Move over Sarah Palin. British philosopher Robin Bunce, writing in Doctor Who and Philosophy, has found a new source of abject evil and abhorrence in the universe: The Daleks. Bunce’s theory that the Daleks’ evil strikes us a little too close to home is being discussed from high table to low tabloids and everywhere in between. Here, here, over here, and over here. Other contributors are getting press attention as well, leading to speculation that the Daleks have set their sites on taking over facebook, starting with editor Court Lewis’s page.
Doctor Who inducted into Who’s Who of PCP books
Posted on | April 10, 2011
Open Court’s recent Doctor Who and Philosophy: Bigger on the Inside is praised by the Guardian’s Ian Sansom as “just published but already indespensable” for tackling this epic show’s big questions. Editor Court Lewis was at the recent Gallifrey One conference giving autographs and fending off daleks, while contributors Ed Webb and Mark Wardecker discussed their chapter on NPR (listen here)