The Blogora: The Rhetoric Society of America

 

Intelligent Design, Less than Intelligent Editorial Decisions


Submitted by syntaxfactory on April 29, 2011 - 6:47am


From the Leiter Reports:
http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2011/04/synthese-editors-cave-in-t...

Synthese Editors Cave in to Pressure from the Intelligent Design Lobby: Philosophers Should Boycott Synthese

It's more than a bit depressing to report that Synthese, a journal that has published classic papers by Carnap and Quine, among many others, and has been a major scholarly forum for philosophy informed by the sciences, should now have caved in to the major enemies of science education in the United States, the Creationist/Intelligent Design lobby. The story is a sordid one, and leads me to think that philosophers working in philosophy of science, epistemology, philosophical logic and other areas where Synthese has traditionally published should look elsewhere (there are certainly many other suitable fora: Erkenntnis, Philosophy of Science, Journal of Philosophical Logic, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, and so on, all of which have the virtue of not pandering to the Intelligent Design crowd). Perhaps the Synthese editors will rectify the wrong, and acknowledge that they caved in to political pressure and behaved unethically. But if not, I hope readers of this blog will stop submitting to Synthese and stop refereeing for them: editorial misconduct of this magnitude must have costs. ...

Submitted by syntaxfactory on May 1, 2011 - 9:37pm.

http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2011/05/the-letter-2-of-the-3-synt...

"They have, alas, betrayed a catastrophic failure of professional judgment, which has damaged the Guest Editors and all the contributors to their Special Issue; the cause of serious science education in the United States; as well as the integrity of Synthese."

Submitted by syntaxfactory on April 29, 2011 - 11:34am.

That loon is a McKnight Emeritus Faculty Member of the U of MN...

I'm not sure it's overblown. The language and vitriol is overblown, but I'm not sure that the boycott is overblown.

Submitted by Jim Aune on April 29, 2011 - 11:21am.

Some of the sociological context is explained here (differences between European and Anglophone analytic philosophy). Heaven knows I would never defend ID or its rhetoric-of-science enablers, but the response by Leiter and others seems really overblown to me (and, frankly, isn't one of the editors of the special issue in question a bit of a, um, loon? 9/11 conspiracy theory and all?)

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.