More Leiter

I should have figured this might have happened, but I recently received an email responding to my recent post by the man himself, Dr. Brian Leiter. Here it is:

Dear Mr. Burns,

A disadvantage of having a large blog readership is that readers often send me links “of interest,” including your long posting of June 2.

Ordinarily, one doesn’t publish e-mail correspondence without permission, but be that as it may, it is clear you took offense at our correspondence, which I regret, though I am disappointed by the way you chose to handle this.

I did not post your subsequent comment on the blog precisely because I did not want to cause a graduate student embarrassment on the Internet.    It would behoove you to realize that your perception of things from Dundee is not everyone else’s informed perception, and you would have done yourself harm, rather than good, by having your views on this particular subject recorded on my blog.

It is unfortunate that in your anger you also chose to insult Michael Rosen.  Rosen took his DPhil in philosophy at Oxford with Charles Taylor, wrote a book on Hegel early in his career, but is best-known for important work on the Frankfurt School.  If in fact his work, and its importance, is not known at Dundee, that would surprise me.   He was hired to cover 19^th- and 20^th-century Continental social and political theory at Harvard, the position held previously by Seyla Benhabib.

I am sorry for having caused offense.

Best wishes,

Brian Leiter

So my favorite part is clearly when I’m told that he didn’t post my comment on his blog to protect me from embarrassment. What does that even mean? I clearly had no problem posting what I had tried to say on my own blog, and have no idea why saying that a few online journals are in fact quite reputable would lead to embarrassment on my behalf. And how would I be harming myself by simply saying that to those of us working in contemporary continental philosophy, these journals are in fact useful and important? It also seems as if he is implying that my institution of study is somehow sub-standard due to my personal opinions on these matters.

I do, however, recognize my comments in regards to Michael Rosen may seem a bit rude, and I will admit that I am not familiar with his work, at all. He is likely very good at what he does, but I stand by my claim that he is by no means an important figure in recent European philosophy, and that he is surely not more notable than many of the figures Leiter previously disregarded.

Besides any regret I have for painting Rosen in an unfair light, I completely stand by my original claims. In an attempt to confront me and ‘apologize’ he managed to insult me a bit more. I have been lucky to come in contact with many well known and notable philosophers who have treated myself, and other students, with an un-necessary amount of respect and kindness, and thus, see no reason to excuse this blatant condescension and disregard on the account of Leiter having a popular blog. I’ve seen philosophers ten times his stature treat students in a kind and charitable fashion, this is just ridiculous.

Also, he had the time to email Graham as well, you can see their interaction here. The Limbaugh of analytic philosophy indeed…