tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345275.post114188187335473211..comments2023-10-30T11:13:44.310-04:00Comments on The Ethical Werewolf ‡ by Neil Sinhababu : On requirements in philosophy departmentsUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345275.post-1143893092177844712006-04-01T07:04:00.000-05:002006-04-01T07:04:00.000-05:00Can someone really just specialize in say the last...Can someone really just specialize in say the last fifty years of philosophy of mind? And if not, then the person would be to some extent a historian/scholar, and would then need languages. And isn't the language requirement a barrier to entry? How do you weed out thousands of applicants if there is no investment in learning a language? That's why nurses learn chemistry.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345275.post-1142442220591743712006-03-15T12:03:00.000-05:002006-03-15T12:03:00.000-05:00I honestly can't see how someone could claim to be...I honestly can't see how someone could claim to be a philosopher and not understand a foreign language. It baffles the mind. That seems like a sure-fire way to tie you to a certain way of thinking.<BR/><BR/>But I think you're right. Four semesters probably isn't enough. Perhaps the philosophy department should require more, including readings in the given language.<BR/><BR/>What is philosophy if not language? How do you know language if you only know one? I can't know about cars generally by just knowing about my own car. I need to know in what ways cars are the same and in what ways they are different. And its best to have a good knowledge of several in order to understand how this works.crevohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01454165271895308641noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345275.post-1142095072133016482006-03-11T11:37:00.000-05:002006-03-11T11:37:00.000-05:00Just to fill in one of the details, Katie -- the ...Just to fill in one of the details, Katie -- the language requirement in our university requires fourth-semester competence in some foreign language. <BR/><BR/>I just finished the language requirement last semester, taking my fourth semester of German. Maybe if I had studied German seriously for two more years and actually read some German literature or lived in Germany, I'd have experienced the gains you're talking about. As it stands, I've gained nothing. I'll mostly forget the German I've learned in a couple of years. Two years of undergraduate German hasn't taught me how to "think in another language" -- instead, I just memorized the way a bunch of pronoun and adjective endings go. I haven't noticed any difference in how my philosophical thinking goes (though I am slightly more adept at using Google Language Tools). <BR/><BR/>I agree that it's good for some philosophers to have in-depth knowledge of a foreign language. Similarly, it's good for some philosophers to know theoretical physics, and good for some philosophers to know lots of economics. That's why we shouldn't require any one of these things. Dadahead's point about how much more there is to know in 2006 than in 1906 is important here.Neil Sinhababuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15672033745772751532noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345275.post-1142014697502068592006-03-10T13:18:00.000-05:002006-03-10T13:18:00.000-05:00As a student of foreign languages and area studies...As a student of foreign languages and area studies, I am generally in support of language requirements. I feel that there's a lot to gain from understanding, communicating, and learning to think in another language. Languages are not simply separate codes for expressing oneself - they are also the code developed by a certain cultural group for expression of their particular way of thinking, of highly specialized cultural experiences, and when a language is lost, we do not only lose that code, but we also lose that knowledge.<BR/><BR/>In applying the defense of langauge learning to philosophy, I would look to the future - surely, there have been many important works of philosophy written in the philosopher's native language, of which we use a translated version. Often, argument is intimately connected to the words used, as they signify specific values. When a non-philosopher translates a philosopher's work, do they really communicate all the meaning implied from work written in the author's native tongue?<BR/><BR/>While it may not be important to have every run-of-the-mill philosophy grad student reading works in the author's native language, some philosophers should continue the study of language. What will happen to the study of philosophy when philosophers of differing native languages can no longer communicate adequately? While this may not happen within our lifetimes, you have to look at the overall effect of an increasing number of universities abolishing foreign language requirements in all disciplines. What knowledge will be lost?<BR/><BR/>In a utilitarian view, I'm sure that this defense does not adequately cover the problem of requirements for ALL students. But how does one promote some study of languages in all disciplines, in order to safeguard the transfer of knowledge between cultures?<BR/><BR/>Just some thoughts.<BR/><BR/>- Katie B.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com