« Why Modal Logic as Metaphysics is -- Pace Williamson -- Not A Science | Main | What to Expect from Peter Ludlow's Lawsuit »



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Kathleen Lowrey

When Leiter linked to the legal papers that included Ludlow's account of what happened between him and the student that originally brought all of this into the public eye, clearly convinced that the "full story" would tend to generate sympathy for Ludlow, I had exactly the opposite reaction. Even were Ludlow's version completely and totally accurate -- the student sent him suggestive texts, invited him out, and so on -- all I could think as a university professor was "and Ludlow's reaction to this was, 'I think I'll invite this student out for drinks!'. Whut?"

I think most of us who teach, male and female, have during our careers at one time or another have had a student or students make some kind of opening gambit -- maybe it's just awkward friendliness, maybe it's trying out a kind of attempt at imagined sophistication they haven't quite fully grasped, maybe it's a come-on, who knows and WHO CARES. Every sensible prof just shuts it down, firmly and kindly. The end!

"S/he started it" -- and I am NOT saying I am convinced it is true in that case -- is never a defense for a prof and we all know it from our own experience. Come on. You don't even have to be a feminist to get this.


Lowrey aserts that "Leiter linked to the legal papers that included Ludlow's account of what happened...clearly convinced that the 'full story' would tend to generate sympathy for Ludlow." This statement is false and recklessly so. There is no evidential basis for attributing a non-existent motive or expectation.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Here's a link to my past blogging (and discussions involving me) at: New APPS.


Blog powered by Typepad