3 ms·

modern 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

by n0us 11y ago

modern 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 ago
SEP 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 ago
  C'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 ago
  They 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.

by n0us 11y ago

modern 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 ago

SEP 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 ago
C'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 ago
They 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.