The New York Times on Legal Education

Congratulations to Tyler Doggett, whose article on “What is Wrong With Kamm’s and Scanlan’s Arguments Against Taurek” got a shout out in today’s front page story.  I’m not sure, though, that all publicity is good publicity.

You may also like...

1 Response

  1. Tyler is a great guy and a fantastic philosopher. More to the point: he’s not a law professor! How did the NYT allow David Segal to imply both that JESP is a law journal (it’s obviously not) and that the author of that piece is a law professor (two seconds on google would demonstrate otherwise)?

    What are they teaching in journalism school? Oh, right Segal didn’t go to journalism school. He has a literature degree from Harvard and a PPE degree from Oxford (or so it appears). Surprising that he would take such an anti-intellectual tone.

    Maybe if he actually read the Doggett article he would understand how the debate between Scanlon (not “Scanlan”), Kamm, and Taurek is hardly an “intra-academy tiff[] that could interest only the combatants.” Did he infer that just because there are three proper names in the title? How long did he spend looking at the article?

    Whether there is a non-consequentialist argument for the principle that we must save the larger number (when confronted with a choice between saving a few and saving many) is of great significance, particularly for those of us who have our worries about consequentialism.

    But whatever, why bother using that Harvard and Oxford education to get all involved with facts and ideas.