Here’s the latest Mini-Heap—10 recent items from the Daily Nous Heap of Links, our regularly updated list of material from around the web that philosophers may want to check out.

(The Heap of Links consists partly of suggestions from readers; if you find something online that you think would be of interest to the philosophical community, please send it in for consideration for the Heap.)

  1. “The number of study places available in each discipline should be linked to labour market need” — a proposal in Denmark with potentially dire consequences for the humanities
  2. Frankfurt’s conception of “bullshit” has never been more relevant –alas
  3. William Jackson Harper (Chidi from “The Good Place”) and Kwame Anthony Appiah team up — to answer ethics questions on NPR’s “Ask Me Another”
  4. “There is nothing unethical about reneging on a temporary, contingent position to accept a tenure-track offer” — that and other judgments about the ethics of backing out of academic job offers
  5. Landmark moments for women in philosophy — including an interactive timeline
  6. Creating brains in vats — mini-ones, for now.
  7. More than ever, there is too much to know — the rational move is to know which knowers have good reputations, and rely on them
  8. Bid on a replica of Thoreau’s cabin at Walden Pond (or click on the banner at the top of the page for other items, like a pencil from the Thoreau Pencil Factory)
  9. Public philosophy: kinds, challenges, and ideals — Caleb Harrison and Macy Salzberger (UNC) talk with Skye Cleary
  10. What exactly is wrong with the alt-right’s anti-Semitism? — Jonathan Anomaly (Arizona) and Nathan Cofnas (Oxford) take a close look
Notify of

1 Comment
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
6 years ago

So I guess I’m late for this, but Buzzfeed’s article was such a joke. (No Stump? No Adams?) The most ridiculous part about it was the author’s description of Judith Jarvis Thompson’s “A Defense of Abortion.” The author says that, in the article, Thomson “argues that a woman has the right to control her own body.” That is a really stupid description of the paper. There is no way that the author read the paper. What Thompson defends is the woman’s right (in many circumstances) to commit justified homicide. If she simply argued that a woman has the right to control her body, then it wouldn’t have been published, since no one denies this.