I'm back [to] my kids in the garbage heap (literally), not getting paid to do philosophy, whereas others are rewarded for playing in garbage. I'm not saying to not reward any of them, I'm saying we should reward all of them, and indeed, it's a measure of our curriculum's worthiness (in some non-relative sense, given we have only the one world) that we should rise to the occasion and do so ("if you're not about ending starvation, how are you really a philosopher -- just asking?" might be my query for a post linguistic turn medical ethicist). [ source, Aug 7, 11:40 pm ]Of course some of this comes across as bitter satire as I'm seeing academia as a real bottle-neck these days. The onus is placed on politicians to save our bacon, whereas of course their abilities have been severely curtailed by their lack of technical skills, the fact that our high schools have been left some thirty to fifty years behind, thanks to ETS and its sick joker "partners in crime" (various brands of hyper-specialist unable to connect the dots outside their own narrow disciplines).
Few respond to this satire though -- it goes over their heads. Academic philosophers have done as poor a job around Wittgenstein as they've done around Bucky Fuller, meaning we have a stronger hand in the private sector. The emerging alliance between high schools and private industry, cutting out high tuition middle-men (a righteous and dogmatic church) should not mean poverty for our faculty however. Getting Food Services and Building Services up to speed is a high priority goal. We need all the talent we can get, and then some.
