The Chronicle: Colloquy: Responses

Professor Singer represents all that is right about philosophy and has built his reputation on it. In a community that values reason and intellectual honesty above all else, he has chosen to address the ugly realities of sensitive issues that many ethicists choose to ignore. His conclusions make us uncomfortable, yet he challenges all who listen to respect the validity of argument as a tool and accept the conclusions it supports.

The current trend of political correctness, however, forces unpopular views to be quickly rejected, and many critics haven't taken the time to read that which they have somehow determined to be offensive. It would appear that they have chosen instead to rely on the inadequacies of sound bites that have misrepresented very complex and serious issues.

Professor Singer, like many who haven't allowed themselves to get too professionally comfortable, is not likely to ever be considered part of the mainstream, though few would doubt his influence. Still, many philosophers prefer to distance themselves not only from Singer, but also from his brand of philosophy - applied ethics. Professor Singer's ideas, like any that oppose convention, are perceived by many as dangerous. I suspect, however, that Peter Singer is more of a threat to the intellectually dishonest than he is to society.

Those who are interested in what serious critics say about Singer's work and how he responds might read Singer and His Critics, edited by Dale Jamieson (Blackwell Publishers, 1999).

: -- James Woods, Philosophy undergraduate, MiraCosta College (posted 3/7, 4 p.m., E.S.T.)

previous response

next response

JOIN THE DEBATE

STEP 1: Your contact information (required)

Your name:

Your title & institution:

Your phone:

Your e-mail address:

STEP 2: Your comments

STEP 3: Submit!

Be sure to include your name and affiliation. Legitimate requests for anonymity will be honored.

The Chronicle maintains Colloquy as an open forum where readers can comment on issues. Submissions may be condensed or edited for clarity, but editing is kept to a minimum. We correct errors in spelling, punctuation, etc. In addition, we remove statements that have the potential to be libelous or to slander someone. In cases in which people make claims that could be libelous, we will remove the names of institutions and departments. But in those cases, we will not alter the ideas contained in the submissions.

Please read our privacy policy or our Colloquy help page if you have questions.

Check this box only if you would like this submission to be considered for publication as a letter to the editor in the printed Chronicle.