|
Thanks Alex, I agree completely upon reflection…
I don’t buy newspapers etc, and I think when they are reporting facts the
least they can do is quote sources etc, I guess in that respect an article
should be like a good research paper. It might be, as you suggest expecting too
much from Journalists, but if they have sources, then it shouldn’t be a
problem. Unless they have something to hide… which they probably do most
of the time, lol… hidden agendas etc. I’m sure though, that there
are plenty of newspaper articles that do quote sources and are more transparent
though… (I hope?) Craig p.s I also second Nick Clarke’s
clarification that there are colleges that offer the proper ‘Philosophy’
A level, and I guess they constitute a majority too! But the ill conduct I drew
attention to does suggest that we should still question stats on this issue. From:
owner-bups-dis@purplepancake.com [mailto:owner-bups-dis@purplepancake.com] On Behalf Of Alex Watt Craig Can I maybe take issue with one little part of your
email: “The last point is that this issue
could clearly be properly addressed if the research methods are sorted. For
instance, re-do the statistics only including properly labelled courses, I
mean, proper philosophy courses at GCSE/A Level etc, then see how big the rise
in philosophy really is. The news paper is not responsible for this, obviously,
it is their source.” The journalist who wrote the article is responsible
for it – not their source. The article is in the journalist’s name
and they should take responsibility for the facts that they have parroted or
failed to understand but nevertheless palmed off on us. In fact, the journalist
does not examine or explain the basis of their statistics nor do they quote a
source to allow anyone else to check them. I accept that I may be setting
unreasonably high standards for a journalist but if we are expected to treat
the article seriously then the standards of reporting need to rise. I would far
rather read 2,500 words of reliable well thought out news than 25,000 words of
speculation of dubious provenance. (It probably explains why I haven’t bought a
newspaper in about 3 months.) I worry deeply about a fall in standards of journalism
as it is a necessary element of a functioning democracy. Alex -----Original
Message----- It came to my attention last term that some 6th Form colleges were
getting into trouble concerning the contents of their Philosophy courses. The
issue was that they were offering AS, A-Level “Philosophy” yet the
content was either that of Religious Studies, or Religious Studies and Ethics,
and Possibly Philosophy of Religion and Ethics... in none of these cases is it
correct to call the course Philosophy straight.
It seems that from the article, apart from the one mention of metaphysics, the
contents seem to be ethical/religious. Which is fine, (I’m neutral on
that) but NOT if its called ‘Philosophy’. I'm not denouncing Philosophy of Religion, or Ethics from
Philosophy as subjects WITHIN philosophy, I would certainly denounce Religious
Studies, that's surely for theology etc... So, the issue is that 'Rise of Philosophy' and reports on the
popularity of Philosophy at A Level are potentially very misleading, if they
are supposed to represent an inclination towards philosophy of young students.
It might just be that the inclination is more towards Religion/Ethics/Politics.
I am one who would ask what of metaphysics, philosophy of language, maths,
science, mind, psychology, history of philosophy, epistemology, logic and the
rest of it? I'm sorry that my information comes from informal talks with
tutors at my university, and I can't give you names of institutions guilty of
mislabelling, or of the enquiries by academic board’s authorities etc...
However, do a search on the net and something I'm sure will pop up, and pay
close attention to the prospectus/syllabus of individual institutions, and
judge for yourself whether the course is rightly called philosophy, or should
be named 'Ethics' or 'Religion' etc. An ironic twist, is that GCSE Advance RE
seems to be more philosophical (in syllabus content) than some A Level
"PHILOSOPHY" courses! The last point is that this issue could clearly be properly
addressed if the research methods are sorted. For instance, re-do the
statistics only including properly labelled courses, I mean, proper philosophy
courses at GCSE/A Level etc, then see how big the rise in philosophy really is.
The news paper is not responsible for this, obviously, it is their source. Not
that it’d help with public perception, I doubt that the newspapers would
be inclined to make important distinctions in content, ethics/politics,
philosophy of religion/religious studies – philosophy/all of the
above… Of course, the stats might have been produced with the proper data
I recommend, but I doubt it considering that intuitions have actually been
GETTING AWAY with the mislabelling… Even if anywhere were interested in
getting proper stats for the ‘Rise of Philosophy’ I doubt it would
be an easy thing, u’d get an awful lot of relativism about how to define
the subject, and I guess you’d even get those arguing that courses that
are merely ethical or religious in content are rightly
labelled philosophy… oh well… I’m not going to opine on the
issue of ‘What is Philosophy’… I could offer nothing more
than intuitive reflection. Best, Craig French |