Weekly Top Five Articles
Saving philosophy from the academy, why kids need trees, why AI is a student crutch (not a resource), and more. . .
Here’s what stood out this week. . .
(1) “Philosophy of the people” by Joseph M Keegin, Aeon (September 10, 2024)
Studying philosophy has been flattened into a single option: academic.
Keegin’s explores the uncertain future of philosophy in the United States as philosophy departments across the country face closures or resource reallocations. He juxtaposes this decline with the rich history of philosophical movements in the 19th-century Midwest, particularly the Platonists of Illinois and the Hegelians of St. Louis. These amateur philosophers, comprised of non-professional thinkers like lawyers and teachers, pursued philosophical inquiry outside formal academic institutions, motivated by the love of wisdom rather than professional success.
Keegin highlights how these groups, led by figures like Henry Clay Brokmeyer and William Torrey Harris, influenced both political and educational systems in the U.S., despite their small numbers. The St. Louis Philosophical Society, for example, had far-reaching impact on U.S. education, including the implementation of the first universal kindergarten program.
In reflecting on this history, Keegin suggests that the future of philosophy might lie outside the traditional university setting, much like it did for these prairie philosophers. He argues for a return to community-based, grassroots learning associations, fueled by a genuine search for wisdom rather than institutional validation.
The article ultimately proposes that as philosophy retreats from the academy, it might reemerge in the “wilderness” of everyday life, drawing parallels to virtual communities and independent projects like the Catherine Project, which aims to democratize philosophical education in the modern world.
This shift reflects a broader call for philosophy to break free from the confines of academia and once again become a vibrant, integral part of life for all.
(2) “Is Blasphemy Illiberal?: Salman Rushdie’s thoroughly modern controversies” by Len Gutkin, The Yale Review, September 9, 2024.
Gutkin examines how blasphemy, often viewed as an outdated concept, remains intricately tied to modern social issues, particularly in liberal democracies. Traditionally seen as an offense against God, blasphemy today is reinterpreted as an offense to the feelings and dignity of religious believers. This shift has deep implications for how societies balance freedom of speech with respect for diverse cultural and religious sensitivities.
Gutkin explores the iconic case of Salman Rushdie, whose 1989 novel The Satanic Verses led to a fatwa calling for his death, marking a watershed moment in global discussions around blasphemy and free speech. Rushdie’s recent memoir Knife reflects on his near-fatal stabbing in 2022, where he describes the attack as a grim reminder of how old, "anachronistic" threats resurface in the present. Gutkin connects this to broader questions about the persistence of blasphemy laws and societal reactions to religious offense, which still provoke violence in various parts of the world.
The article goes beyond Rushdie’s experience to explore modern applications of blasphemy in pluralist societies. Gutkin highlights how blasphemy is increasingly tied to multiculturalism and respect for diversity. In the UK, for instance, the controversial 1977 conviction of Gay News editor Denis Lemon for publishing an erotic poem about Christ underscored the tension between artistic freedom and protecting religious sensitivities. This case, along with others, sparked debates on whether blasphemy laws should be expanded to protect all religions, not just Christianity. Though blasphemy laws were ultimately repealed in the UK in 2008, the discussion continues, with many arguing for or against the necessity of protecting religious groups from insult in today’s increasingly diverse societies.
Gutkin also raises important questions about blasphemy's role in social justice movements. For example, blasphemy has historically been used as a tactic for emancipation from oppressive religious norms, as seen in the protests by irreligious Jews in the early 20th century and the writings of B. R. Ambedkar in India. In this context, blasphemy can serve as a tool of resistance for marginalized groups, challenging religious authorities that perpetuate social inequalities.
Blasphemy’s relevance in today’s social issues, Gutkin argues, lies in its complex relationship with both freedom of expression and multiculturalism. As societies become more pluralistic, the tension between protecting religious feelings and upholding free speech will continue to challenge legal and cultural norms, making blasphemy a topic that remains as potent and controversial as ever.
(3) “Tree-covered neighborhoods linked to lower ADHD risk in children,” by Eric W. Dolan, PsyPost, September 12, 2024
A recent study published in the Journal of Environmental Psychology suggests that exposure to tree-covered greenspaces may indirectly reduce the risk of ADHD in children by encouraging physical activity, which supports healthy neurodevelopment. The research, conducted as part of the NeuroSmog project in Poland, examined 689 children aged 10-13 and found that while tree cover did not directly lower ADHD diagnoses, it promoted physical activity, which was linked to lower ADHD risk.
Interestingly, the study did not find a similar link with grass-covered areas or a significant connection between social cohesion and ADHD. It emphasizes the importance of specific types of greenspaces, like tree-covered environments, in promoting mental health and neurodevelopment in children. The findings highlight the need for urban planners to prioritize natural environments that encourage physical activity to support childhood development.
The study is part of ongoing efforts to explore the effects of environmental factors, like air pollution and greenspace, on children’s neurodevelopment. Future research will aim to explore the long-term impacts of greenspace exposure on ADHD and other developmental outcomes.
This research was authored by Dorota Buczyłowska and colleagues, offering valuable insights into how urban environments can shape children's mental health.
(4) “Students tend to rely on AI rather than learn from it, study finds” by Vladimir Hedrih, PsyPost, September 12, 2024
A recent study published in Computers & Education found that while AI tools improve the quality of student peer feedback, they also create a dependency, causing students to struggle when AI support is removed. The research, led by Ali Darvishi, examined students using an adaptive education system called RiPPLE. In the study, students initially received AI-powered prompts to help them provide better feedback. However, when the AI assistance was removed, the quality of student feedback dropped significantly unless self-regulation strategies like checklists were used.
The study’s results showed that students who relied solely on AI produced better reviews compared to those without AI or those using self-monitoring checklists alone. Interestingly, combining AI with checklists did not significantly improve performance beyond AI use alone. These findings raise concerns about students' reliance on AI, suggesting that while AI can aid learning, it may also hinder the development of self-regulated learning skills when overused.
The study highlights a critical challenge as AI becomes more integrated into education: finding a balance between using AI as a tool and ensuring students maintain their ability to self-regulate and think critically.
This study, titled "Impact of AI assistance on student agency," adds to ongoing discussions about the role of AI in shaping student learning and agency. As AI use in education grows, understanding its impact on student independence and cognitive development will be key to ensuring effective learning outcomes.
(5) People tend to exaggerate the immorality of their political opponents by Vladimir Hedrih, PsyPost, September 8, 2024
A recent study, published in PNAS Nexus, reveals that people tend to overestimate the immorality of their political opponents, assuming they condone basic moral wrongs like fraud or wrongful imprisonment. Conducted over eight studies, researchers found that both Democrats and Republicans believe that their political counterparts support fundamental moral wrongs at much higher rates than they actually do. For instance, Democrats estimated that over 25% of Republicans support wrongful imprisonment, while the actual number was under 4%. Similarly, Republicans believed that about 32% of Democrats condone cheating on a spouse, when in reality, fewer than 5% held such views.
This tendency, termed the "basic morality bias," exacerbates political hostility and gridlock in the U.S. The study also showed that correcting these exaggerated perceptions can reduce dehumanization and foster better cross-partisan engagement. Participants who learned that a single opponent rejected basic moral wrongs were more willing to collaborate and engage with the opposing political group.
The findings suggest that addressing this bias could be key to easing political divisions and fostering more constructive interactions across party lines. However, the study's authors caution that the research largely relied on politically engaged online samples, and it remains unclear how long the corrections in perception will last.
This work, led by Curtis Puryear and colleagues, offers insight into the psychological mechanisms fueling partisan divides and highlights potential strategies for reducing political animosity.
One thing about the Catherine project is that it is using resources that are available to it because of academic philosophy. The founder is a Tutor (professor) at St. John’s College, and is to some extent taking advantage of the school’s alumni, who themselves have the benefit of four years of class room discussions of major works of philosophy, to help guide the study groups and ensure that participants have a fruitful experience. Granted that is a different project than what most other professors of philosophy take on, but it is still in some ways entwined with higher education, as opposed to wholly “grass roots”.