Multiplying Enemies Beyond Necessity
It is not something a wise man does. By this criterion, Brian Leiter is no wise man. His vicious attacks on people, as unnecessary as they are personal, make him enemies. Some of the people he abuses are willing to view it all with Olympian detachment: "The dog barks, the caravan passes." Others, however, fight back.
Dr. Keith Burgess-Jackson is building a massive case against Leiter in a weblog especially devoted to the task entitled Brian Leiter, Academic Thug. Its purpose is explained in this inaugural post.
For a careerist as status-obsessed as Leiter is, this cannot be a welcome development. But he has only himself to blame.
Posted by William F. Vallicella on
Tuesday January 17, 2006 at 6:14am
Bob Doyle
It is hard to know how to deal with someone like Leiter. Should he be ignored, or opposed and exposed for what he is? Resist not the evildoer? Or oppose him? Evildoers unopposed become emboldened, and more of their bad behavior is the upshot. But Keith's opposing of Leiter ties him to him. K becomes defined by his opposition.
Over at the excellent humor site, Wicked Thoughts, Leiter is known as Ladderman. See here, and follow the links.
Thanks for the reference ... I will certainly check it out.
I did not mean to come off as critical of Keith -- I enjoy both his Analphilosopher and Leiter blogs -- but I do suspect Keith's efforts will do nothing to convince Leiter to become a more civil and charitable person. In fact, it may accomplish quite the opposite. Which may be just as well, as the proof of his academic thuggery grows with every word he writes and I, not being the target of Leiter's pen, can sit back and enjoy him make a fool of himself!
Bob Doyle
Leftists are not known for their civility which, after all, is a conservative virtue; and Leiter in particular is beyond hope in this regard.
2. Disallowing comments from a particular person, or deleting an offensive, off-topic, or otherwise substandard comment, has nothing to do with censorship. People who think otherwise confuse censorship with lack of sponsorship. I am under an obligation not to interfere with anyone's exercise of legitimate free speech rights. But I am not under any obligation to aid and abet anyone's exercise of free speech rights, legitimate or illegitimate.
3. The Comments area is not an open forum for anyone to say anything about any topic. As the name implies, it is primarily for commenting on the author(s)' posts. But to comment on them, one must have read them. And if I have spent three hours on a post, a reader will not understand it in thirty seconds. Secondarily, the Comments area is to facilitate civil discussion between and among commenters as long as the discussion remains on-topic.
4. Some undesirables: The skimmers, those who cannot read but only read-in. The sophists who, abusing argument, argue for the sake of argument. The ideologues, those who are out for power, not truth. The uncivil. The illogical. The politically correct. Worst of all, perhaps, are those who exemplify the anti-Socratic property: those who think they know what they don't know. If Socrates was famous for his learned ignorance, these types are marked by their ignorant unlearnededness.