According to those who have reviewed the complaint, it includes dozens of pages of supporting documents alleging that Pogge has engaged in a long-term pattern of discriminatory conduct, including unwanted sexual advances, quid pro quo offers of letters of recommendation and other perks, employment retaliation in response to charges of sexual misconduct, and sexual assault. Included in the complaint are affidavits from former colleagues at Columbia University who attest that Pogge was accused of sexual harassment by a student in his department, and disciplined for this....
We hope that investigation of the civil rights complaint will shed further light on this matter. But bringing the complaint to resolution will be a long and complex process focused more on Yale's handling of these claims, rather than on the specific allegations against Pogge. Meanwhile, the academic community must make its own decision about how to respond in light of what has been made public. We write, then, to express our belief that the information now in the public domain — including that provided by Pogge himself in the aforementioned email correspondence — suffices to demonstrate that Pogge has engaged in behavior that violates the norms of appropriate professional conduct. Nothing is more important to our philosophical community than the trust he has betrayed. Based on the information that has been made public, we strongly condemn his harmful actions toward women, most notably women of color, and the entire academic community.--
Has philosophy reached its Geoff* Marcy moment? I have in mind the episode about the famous astronomer who resigned once his own colleagues broke the culture of silence:
Fellow astronomers started speaking out against his [Geoff Marcy's] behavior, while some said he wasn't welcome at an academic annual gathering.
Twenty-four of his colleagues in the astronomy department at UC Berkeley called for him to leave and more than 2,500 academics signed an online petition, posted by Buzz Feed, to support people who were 'targets' of his 'inappropriate behavior' and those who have 'spoken publicly about it'.--Daily Mail
The Open letter Regarding Thomas Pogge was signed by at least (if I counted correctly) sixteen colleagues of Pogge at Yale as well as many other influential professional philosophers who represent many different ways of doing philosophy today. The letter relies on the fact that there is now quite a bit of evidence that Pogge's behavior has harmed both a number of women as well as harmed the professional community. One other fact that has become increasingly clear is that the behavior in question spans several decades.
Not unlike Geoff Marcy, Thomas Pogge 'got away with it' for so long in part because [some combination of] (i) the culture of confidentiality that universities impose on misconduct hearings (recall); (ii) the conspiracy of silence -- and let's be frank, opportunism -- that existed in the complicit profession that allowed Pogge to move jobs despite warning signs (and recall); (iii) victims find it incredibly difficult to get a fair hearing and be believed (not to mention the anonymous blogosphere that will attack them relentlessly); (iv) Pogge leveraged his status and influence so that he could generate all kinds of subtle "quid pro quo offers of letters of recommendation and other perks;" (v) a willingness to disassociate philosophical excellence from philosophical integrity (recall); (vi) an embrace of procedural conceptions of justice that leave little room for other forms of norm enforcement so that many philosophers refused to act on (increasing amount of) testimonial evidence about, or their own experiences with, Pogge's behavior; (vii) the persistence of outright sexism in higher education; (viii) the old mainstream media's unwillingness to report [contrast that with Buzzfeed and Huffpo]; (ix) in a zero-sum environment [of jobs, status, attention] the indirect, individual benefits received by non-victims [primarily male] when some talented women leave the profession or are discouraged.
It is quite possible to be cynical about open letters and signatures and see in them mere symbolic action by the very people that benefited and benefit from a (somewhat) corrupt status quo. The signatures do not undermine all the norms and incentives that govern and sustain (i-ix)--some of which shared with other academic disciplines and institutions. But these signatures also represent, or so I think, the impact of, say, half a decade of public and private discussions locally and collectively (in social media) initiated (for us) by MFIF (My fault, I'm female) and what's it like to be a woman in philosophy (of course they were building on other people's efforts in feminism, standpoint epistemology, and social movements, etc.). These discussions are not mere gossip or somehow orthogonal to true philosophy. For, critical reflection on the norms and practices of (professional) philosophy just is a part of philosophy in all kinds of ways (i.e., as elements of meta-philosophy, social epistemology, standpoint epistemology, the nature of intellectual virtue, etc.).
In addition, astronomers showed us how to embrace a whole bunch of (undoubtedly imperfect) norms and best practices on these matters (recall). Leaving aside the fate of Thomas Pogge, the Open Letter and these signatures continue our collective education and, thereby, help create the foundations for norm changes that will, let's hope, not betray the young women who wish to become professional philosophers; thereby we can hope to improve the quality and humanity of our collective endeavor.
*[Corrected]: I thank Filippo Contesi for catching a (repeated) typo in Geoff Marcy's name.
Comments