I just got home from the University of Utah in Salt Lake City, where I gave my talk arguing for the following slogan:
pessimistic induction + common accounts of reference = semantic anti-realism.
For the blogpost version, with a decent comment thread, see here.
Salt Lake is physically beautiful, and socially it seems to be a strange combination of hippies and Mormons. The Utah department was really great -- plus, Jim Tabery was a model host. The only thing I want to post, though, was Ron Mallon's description of my work on Carnap et al.: he characterized me as a 'boutique historian.' I don't know whether the expression is original to him, but I definitely plan to steal it to describe myself in the future.
4 comments:
What does "boutique historian" mean?
I imagine you haven't developed an interest in how exactly Dolce came to know Gabbana.
Aren't we all boutiquy? Historians or otherwise?
Re: "Aren't we all boutiquy?"
Certainly philosophy has become very specialized recently, and history of philosophy seems to be no exception. Nonetheless, I do think there is a difference between publishing on some unpublished notes of Carnap, on the one hand, and, on the other, working on the First Critique, the Meditations, or the Republic. But I could be wrong.
Will I see you at the PSA?
Oops, forgot about this post. Yes, I hope to be at PSA. Its something of a reunion, afterall...
Thanks very much for your useful post.
I would like to introduce all job description at
Free sample job descriptions
Best regards
Post a Comment