5 ms·
> It now contains nearly 1,500 entries, and changes are made daily. I tried a few entries, it covers history well, but entries about modern philosophy are very
by jkot 11y ago
> It now contains nearly 1,500 entries, and changes are made daily.
I tried a few entries, it covers history well, but entries about modern philosophy are very biased.
- Retra 11y agoBiased how?
- n0us 11y agomodern or contemporary? Please explain the bias you find in the articles. Having majored in philosophy and used this site extensively I don't recall finding any bias.
- chadzawistowski 11y agoSEP does seem to focus much more strongly on analytic philosophy than continental, although that's arguably a bias of the entire discipline. Jean-Luc Nancy, Gianni Vattimo, and Luce Irigaray are all missing, for instance. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Luc_Nancy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Luc_Nancy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gianni_Vattimo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gianni_Vattimo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luce_Irigaray https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luce_Irigaray
- dajohnson89 11y agoC'mon. That's not bias, that's selective coverage. The term bias in the context of encyclopedia articles means slant, or to use the silly wikipedia terminology, "point of view". SEP is pretty good about avoiding bias in that sense.
- hyperpape 11y agoThey also don't have Kripke, Putnam or Fodor. I dare say that going by relative prestige in their philosophical cultures, Kripke is a more startling omission than any of the three you mentioned (http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2015/01/most-important-anglophone-philosophers-1945-2000-the-top-20.html http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2015/01/most-important...). That's not a point about merit, btw, just about who people would write about if personal articles showed favoritism. I wonder if there's a tendency to not write articles on living philosophers (as opposed to some particular aspect of their work). Still, I do suspect there is less work on 20th century Continental philosophy (so far as that's a well defined thing).
- glomph 11y ago'Entries should focus on the philosophical issues and arguments rather than on sociology and individuals, particularly in discussions of topics in contemporary philosophy.' The lack of those articles is policy not bias because they are contempry philosophers.
- glomph 11y agoDo you have examples? I am studying philosophy and most people in the department consider it a good resource even when the author of a particular article disagrees with them (in their other published work).
- jkot 11y agoThere are no entries for 'embarrassing' subjects such as Marxism or Leninism... But entry about Colonialism has huge propaganda from Lenin, while not much about positive impact of colonialism.
- njharman 11y agoSo "biased" in the sense that it is not biased towards your world view.
- jkot 11y agoNo, it totally ignores my world view. Marxism-Leninism was the biggest event in philosophy, since Aristotle and I think it deserves at least small chapter in "authoritative" encyclopedia :-)
- skissane 11y agoI did a search on "Marxism". Got 79 articles back. I don't think it can fairly be accused of ignoring Marxism.
- Maken 11y agoThat's because they is a good number of articles that mention "Marxism" as a philosophy, yet it doesn't have it's own article.
- yarou 11y agoI'd argue that Marxism is tangential to philosophy proper. It has more to do with political economy than dialectical materialism. If you want that, you should read Hegel.