![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Slide in all directions
Nov. 19th, 2007 11:59 pm
Currently at Toronto Pearson: 5. High today: 5. There was still a bit of slushy ice coating one of the boards that bridge a bit of what would be Castle Frank Brook, in the bottom of Nordheimer Ravine, when I walked through around 2:30 this afternoon. Given that there couldn't have been much ice to begin with, it goes to show how much lower the temperature can be in low-lying pockets (since the temperature was already at 5 by 2 at Pearson, and had been above freezing since 9).
It's a good thing I don't have a job. If I did, I'd only be able to do 1/100 of what I think IT IS REALLY IMPORTANT THAT I SHOULD DO, instead of 1/10.
One of the things I started doing today, which I'm pretty sure I shouldn't actually be doing at all, at least insofar as there are many more important things to do, is going through the Review of Metaphysics, volume by volume, starting with 1959 (because the Trinity College library's collection starts there), writing down the names of people I have heard of whom the Review of Metaphysics records as having finished their PhDs in philosophy in the previous year, and what school they did their PhDs at. I am testing my hypothesis that it's basically impossible to be someone that anyone has heard of unless you come from a Top School. So far, I have gotten up to 1975.
Here are some Interesting Facts: give or take a few--and, counting up all these names one by one, I'm definitely giving and taking a few here and there--the Review of Metaphysics records 4055 philosophy doctorates completed between 1959 and 1975. Of those 4055 philosophy doctors of philosophy, I have heard of 98. (My rule of thumb as to whether I have heard of someone: I can fairly confidently think of some sort of thing this person has done.) The funny thing is, 98 actually seems like quite a few people to have heard of (especially for someone like me, with a highly suspect philosophical education)--but it's less than 2.5% of the total.
18 of the 98 people I have heard of came from Harvard, 13 from Princeton, 10 from Columbia, 8 from Yale, 6 from the University of Pittsburgh, 6 from the University of Toronto (all but one of whom I know by personal acquaintance or personal acquaintance of personal acquaintance), 4 from Duquesne, 3 from Cornell, 3 from Boston University, and 3 from Penn State. I think those are the only schools that graduated more than two philosophy PhDs that I have heard of in that period. So, an even 50% came from Harvard, Princeton, Columbia, and Yale--actually lower than I expected. I'm surprised at how many came from Pittsburgh, which I think of as one of the Leiter-boosted schools, but Pittsburgh already had several impressive people teaching in the '60s and '70s. (The other main school I think of as Leiter-boosted, NYU, graduated only one PhD I have heard of during the sample period--Leonard Peikoff, who I've heard of because he was Ayn Rand's little buddy.) I am suprised that only two came from Chicago. I would have to say that more schools than I would have expected are represented--at a quick count, 39. (A number of them, however, are Catholic schools, whose PhDs' names often start with "Sister". It's hard to say whether they should even be included in the sample, not because they're lousy, but because Catholic philosophy really is pretty much a separate system, even today.) The one person I have heard of from U of Toronto because he is objectively well-known is Graeme Nicholson (who has since taught at U of T); the only other person from a Canadian school who I have heard of because that person is objectively well-known is Bela Szabados, who came from Calgary. (York graduated its first two PhDs in 1973; none in '74 or '75.) There is definitely trend toward diversification that starts in 1965, which is, I guess, what you'd expect given the hiring boom in the '60s and '70s. An interesting question is whether there is a homogenization starting in the '80s, when the great (and still ongoing) hiring crunch started and hiring schools basically had their pick of the Top Candidates each year.
Now, of course, here's the really exciting bit. In the first year of my sample, there were 92 PhDs. In the next year, there were 72. It breaks 100 in 1961. It breaks 200 in 1966. It breaks 300 in 1970. It breaks 400 in 1973. It stays over 400 in 1974, and goes back down to 362 in 1975. (Some of the increase in the first few years will be due to not everyone having gotten on their reporting program yet. But it looks like most everyone who was graduating philosophy PhDs in any significant number was on board from the beginning.) I will be interested to see whether 1973 and 1974 represent a peak. I hope they do (though I very much doubt it), because counting all these names gives me a heart attack, in its incredible-waste-of-time-ness. Writing this post is also giving me a heart attack, in its incredible-waste-of-time-ness.
But, you know, it is, after all, useful to know what the landscape's like. I guess. Actually, I should quit this now. (Although I do intend to go back and see if I've ever heard of anyone who got a PhD in philosophy from York before I was there.)
Anyway, speaking of incredible wastes, this is the sort of reason I have become reluctant to get a new computer despite my present computer's craptacularity, though I never actually thought of things being that bad. If this is what happens to the 70% of the world's "e-waste" that ends up in China, it makes ya wonder what happens to the most-of-the-other-30% that ends up in India and Africa.
Which reminds me that it recently occurred to me, having been hearing about the mercury in the compact fluorescent light bulbs for some time now, that, wait, wouldn't that likely mean there is mercury in non-compact fluorescent light tubes--which are generally disposed of in the city by being left on the sidewalk, frequently to be smashed before they're picked up? Uncle Wikipedia has just confirmed for me that, yes, there is mercury in those too. But not as much as there used to be. So, that's a comfort.
It's a good thing I don't have a job. If I did, I'd only be able to do 1/100 of what I think IT IS REALLY IMPORTANT THAT I SHOULD DO, instead of 1/10.
One of the things I started doing today, which I'm pretty sure I shouldn't actually be doing at all, at least insofar as there are many more important things to do, is going through the Review of Metaphysics, volume by volume, starting with 1959 (because the Trinity College library's collection starts there), writing down the names of people I have heard of whom the Review of Metaphysics records as having finished their PhDs in philosophy in the previous year, and what school they did their PhDs at. I am testing my hypothesis that it's basically impossible to be someone that anyone has heard of unless you come from a Top School. So far, I have gotten up to 1975.
Here are some Interesting Facts: give or take a few--and, counting up all these names one by one, I'm definitely giving and taking a few here and there--the Review of Metaphysics records 4055 philosophy doctorates completed between 1959 and 1975. Of those 4055 philosophy doctors of philosophy, I have heard of 98. (My rule of thumb as to whether I have heard of someone: I can fairly confidently think of some sort of thing this person has done.) The funny thing is, 98 actually seems like quite a few people to have heard of (especially for someone like me, with a highly suspect philosophical education)--but it's less than 2.5% of the total.
18 of the 98 people I have heard of came from Harvard, 13 from Princeton, 10 from Columbia, 8 from Yale, 6 from the University of Pittsburgh, 6 from the University of Toronto (all but one of whom I know by personal acquaintance or personal acquaintance of personal acquaintance), 4 from Duquesne, 3 from Cornell, 3 from Boston University, and 3 from Penn State. I think those are the only schools that graduated more than two philosophy PhDs that I have heard of in that period. So, an even 50% came from Harvard, Princeton, Columbia, and Yale--actually lower than I expected. I'm surprised at how many came from Pittsburgh, which I think of as one of the Leiter-boosted schools, but Pittsburgh already had several impressive people teaching in the '60s and '70s. (The other main school I think of as Leiter-boosted, NYU, graduated only one PhD I have heard of during the sample period--Leonard Peikoff, who I've heard of because he was Ayn Rand's little buddy.) I am suprised that only two came from Chicago. I would have to say that more schools than I would have expected are represented--at a quick count, 39. (A number of them, however, are Catholic schools, whose PhDs' names often start with "Sister". It's hard to say whether they should even be included in the sample, not because they're lousy, but because Catholic philosophy really is pretty much a separate system, even today.) The one person I have heard of from U of Toronto because he is objectively well-known is Graeme Nicholson (who has since taught at U of T); the only other person from a Canadian school who I have heard of because that person is objectively well-known is Bela Szabados, who came from Calgary. (York graduated its first two PhDs in 1973; none in '74 or '75.) There is definitely trend toward diversification that starts in 1965, which is, I guess, what you'd expect given the hiring boom in the '60s and '70s. An interesting question is whether there is a homogenization starting in the '80s, when the great (and still ongoing) hiring crunch started and hiring schools basically had their pick of the Top Candidates each year.
Now, of course, here's the really exciting bit. In the first year of my sample, there were 92 PhDs. In the next year, there were 72. It breaks 100 in 1961. It breaks 200 in 1966. It breaks 300 in 1970. It breaks 400 in 1973. It stays over 400 in 1974, and goes back down to 362 in 1975. (Some of the increase in the first few years will be due to not everyone having gotten on their reporting program yet. But it looks like most everyone who was graduating philosophy PhDs in any significant number was on board from the beginning.) I will be interested to see whether 1973 and 1974 represent a peak. I hope they do (though I very much doubt it), because counting all these names gives me a heart attack, in its incredible-waste-of-time-ness. Writing this post is also giving me a heart attack, in its incredible-waste-of-time-ness.
But, you know, it is, after all, useful to know what the landscape's like. I guess. Actually, I should quit this now. (Although I do intend to go back and see if I've ever heard of anyone who got a PhD in philosophy from York before I was there.)
Anyway, speaking of incredible wastes, this is the sort of reason I have become reluctant to get a new computer despite my present computer's craptacularity, though I never actually thought of things being that bad. If this is what happens to the 70% of the world's "e-waste" that ends up in China, it makes ya wonder what happens to the most-of-the-other-30% that ends up in India and Africa.
Which reminds me that it recently occurred to me, having been hearing about the mercury in the compact fluorescent light bulbs for some time now, that, wait, wouldn't that likely mean there is mercury in non-compact fluorescent light tubes--which are generally disposed of in the city by being left on the sidewalk, frequently to be smashed before they're picked up? Uncle Wikipedia has just confirmed for me that, yes, there is mercury in those too. But not as much as there used to be. So, that's a comfort.
