I quit. I freely confess, the medium has defeated me. It was fun blogging while it lasted, but it is no longer fun so I am just going to quit. I am not going to shut this blog down; I will simply stop posting. Those of you who have taken it over can do what you wish with it.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
A Commentary on the Passing Scene by Robert Paul Wolff rwolff@afroam.umass.edu
My Stuff
https://umass-my.sharepoint.com/:f:/g/personal/rwolff_umass_edu/EkxJV79tnlBDol82i7bXs7gBAUHadkylrmLgWbXv2nYq_A?e=UcbbW0
Coming Soon:
The following books by Robert Paul Wolff are available on Amazon.com as e-books: KANT'S THEORY OF MENTAL ACTIVITY, THE AUTONOMY OF REASON, UNDERSTANDING MARX, UNDERSTANDING RAWLS, THE POVERTY OF LIBERALISM, A LIFE IN THE ACADEMY, MONEYBAGS MUST BE SO LUCKY, AN INTRODUCTION TO THE USE OF FORMAL METHODS IN POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY.
Now Available: Volumes I, II, III, and IV of the Collected Published and Unpublished Papers.
Now Available: Volumes I, II, III, and IV of the Collected Published and Unpublished Papers.
NOW AVAILABLE ON YOUTUBE: LECTURES ON KANT'S CRITIQUE OF PURE REASON. To view the lectures, go to YouTube and search for "Robert Paul Wolff Kant." There they will be.
NOW AVAILABLE ON YOUTUBE: LECTURES ON THE THOUGHT OF KARL MARX. To view the lectures, go to YouTube and search for Robert Paul Wolff Marx."
Total Pageviews
Search This Blog
Philosopher's Stone
Blog Archive
-
▼
2023
(228)
-
▼
August
(30)
- STILL
- GAME ON!!
- LUCK
- STILL
- MORE THOUGHTS WHILE WAITING FOR JUDGE CHUTKAN TOI...
- ANNIVERSARIES
- THIS AND THAT WHILE I WAIT FOR JUDGE CHUTKIN TO RULE
- BIG NEWS WHEN YOU ARE EIGHTY-NINE
- THIS AND THAT
- STILL HERE, A LITTLE THE WORSE FOR WEAR
- STILL
- STILL
- STILL
- THIS IS WORTH READING
- STILL
- I HAVE READ IT
- MORE ON THE SAME TOPIC
- I CONTINUE
- NUMBERS
- MORE ON INEQUALITY
- AS I WAIT
- A RESPONSE
- THAT''S IT
- STILL
- STRANGE FACT
- STILL
- I WILL REPEAT
- MORE THOIUGHTS ON THE INDICTMENT
- AT LAST
- FIGHT FIERCELY, HARVARD
-
▼
August
(30)
About Me
- Robert Paul Wolff
- As I observed in one of my books, in politics I am an anarchist, in religion I am an atheist, and in economics I am a Marxist. I am also, rather more importantly, a husband, a father, a grandfather, and a violist.
24 comments:
Professor Wolff, please do not stop blogging.
Rest assured that your lengthy blogs on matters philosophical and political are eagerly read. They provoke vigourous discussion. To be sure, some of it strays from your original theme.... but any harms and distractions that involves are far outweighed by the stimulation your blogs provide to the community.
I agree with David Zimmerman. He said it better than I could have.
I agree also.
I don't come for the comments. I find the comments often an exercise in self-importance, and everything I hated about studying philosophy for a brief time (in sum, pedantic dudes who want to win). Turn off the comments and continue to post as you see fit, whenever you see fit.
Sad to see it come to this, but also grateful for what you've done over the years.
On that note, I offer a suggestion to commenters on this thread: Use this space to pay tribute to Prof. Wolff by sharing your favorite memories or other personally significant features of his work.
Something small but significant, in my own case: I've seen Prof. Wolff eloquently compare the tasks of interpreting a classic work of philosophical literature, on the one hand, and interpreting a classic work of music, on the other.
(I'm regrettably unable to quote the exact analogy or find any specific instances at the moment. Can anyone assist on this?)
I find that the professor's analogy frequently springs into my own mind as I make my own (often frustrated, sometimes seemingly feeble) efforts to come to grips with any great philosopher. It helps to remember that it's not exactly about "getting them right"; it's more about making of them whatever you yourself are able to - and hopefully this is something interesting, enriching, illuminating, encouraging, or otherwise humanly valuable. ("Bonus points" if others see it in the same way.) Different readers/musicians make for different "performances," which aren't less valuable on that account.
Prof. Wolff, I understand the frustration but I hope you reconsider and please continue to post the brief OK notification when you are unable to post anything else. I hope you found the results in Ohio last night cheering.
Everyone else, extensive and heated discussion of an initial indictment before the evidence is laid out in open court and there are obvious possibilities of superseding indictments seems pointless. Also, we don't know who, if anyone, has flipped.
Also, also respect the wishes of the proprietor.
I understand why you came to this decision. I have known several people who set up blogs only to have to take them down due to abusive commentary and the like. I regret this situation as now is the time when incisive analysis of the current political situation is needed more than ever. If I may make a suggestion: you could ask participants to post on relevant topics thus taking over your role. Of course you can chime in when ever you desire.
I may be absurdly naive, but this forum should be closer to a moderated grad school seminar where folks stick to the point and add thoughtful, reasoned comments rather than a forum to be hijacked by individuals who have no interest in the life of the mind.
In any event, thank you.
Kant's major philosophical idea found in his 'Critique of Pure Reason', which Dr. Wolff summarized by saying "objects conform to the mind", is an idea that I immediately became convinced was inherently flawed. To me such an idea goes against the basic logic of common sense. So is Kant correct or not? The summarized idea can be found in Dr. Wolff's introduction to Kant's Prolegomena in Wolff's book found at Amazon's site here:
https://www.amazon.com/Ten-Great-Works-Philosophy-Various/dp/0451528301/ref=asc_df_0451528301/?tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=312057556784&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=11102175330891157364&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=m&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9032742&hvtargid=pla-570208401828&psc=1&tag=&ref=&adgrpid=61851652253&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvadid=312057556784&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=11102175330891157364&hvqmt=&hvdev=m&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9032742&hvtargid=pla-570208401828
Following what Michael says above about what I most value in what I've learned from this blog.
1. Which side are you on: Professor Wolff's idea that there is a basic pre-rational commitment to one side or another in politics. That reminds me that I'm on the left even though at times the left can be as petty, as unthinking, as dishonest, as dogmatic, as sanctimonious as the right.
2. The cause of the left is a long march and so if you're going to participate, pick an activity that you're comfortable with. I don't like protest demonstrations, the shouting, the slogans, the group think all irritate me and in any case, with my sciatica I can't keep up with the other demonstrators and still less run from the cops if things get messy as they often do. Long speeches bore me as do political meetings, but I can donate money and I can vote, which I always do.
No blogger should keep blogging if he/she/they (as the case may be) finds it a chore, unpleasant, and/or torture, whether because of (allegedly) unruly and "self-important" commenters, occasionally abusive and ad hominem remarks in comments, or for other reasons. Blogging should at least occasionally be fun for the blogger, and if it's not fun at least occasionally, there's no point in doing it. The site remaining up, and Prof. Wolff's YouTube lectures and link to the archive of his works, will continue to be valuable resources for those interested, whether he continues posting or not.
Most bloggers would be glad to have long, often on-topic comment threads, even if they sometimes get heated, but I sense that Prof. Wolff is generally not glad about that. (Putting aside particular people.) So he should either shut down all comments in future, delete more comments he finds objectionable or inappropriate, or stop posting. A last point: no one has "taken over" this blog. Prof. Wolff is in charge and basically can do whatever he wants: that is the prerogative of any blogger and one of the foundational "rules" (as I understand it at any rate) of the blogosphere.
Thank you very much for all the inspiration, fun and delight that your posts and video lectures have provided over many years now.
Respect, and all the best to you.
Cheers,
trane
Professor Wolff, I came across your blog a little over a year ago after watching your Kant lectures. From what I can make out a lot of your (commenting) audience has a few decades on me. So forgive the intrusion of an upstart, but…
It has been a joy to discover and engage with your work. Both your writing here and your lectures on YouTube have taught me an immeasurable amount. They helped me fall back in love with learning and gave me both the impetus and the tools to sit down and try to wrestle with some of the great works of philosophy - I don’t know I ever would have otherwise.
I have heard you repeat many times over that you love to teach. I will speak for myself and say that your blog has and will always be a platform of learning. I hope that in time you will continue to teach those of us who regularly check in here.
Either way, thank you. Sincerely. From a West Country boy with a patchy education it has been a privilege to have been taught by you.
All the very best.
I put up a tribute to the professor the last time he was leaving, so I won't repeat it. After reflection, I'm struck at how the professor's writings have accompanied me for four decades. When I initially did an intensive class on the Critique of Pure Reason, my guides were Kemp Smith's commentary and the professor's Kant's Theory of Mental Activity. I was fortunate to follow that almost immediately with reading Lukács's 'Reification and the Consciousness of the Proletariat', so any Kantian mental buds were nipped and exterminated. Then for a long time In Defense of Anarchism was a lodestar, though over many years it started to seem that what it showed was that, if one started from something like Kantian premises, you couldn't justify the state--and Kantian premises were non-starters. More recently, The Poverty of Liberalism has been a great aid in steadying the course through the toxic swamp of liberal ideologies. I think the professor's posts have for me been the single most salient recent exemplum of public intellectualism, with an incomparable synthesis of responsiveness, geniality and graciousness, and penetration.--As for commentary: For me the sociological puzzle is: Why (seemingly) so few women? And why the (seemingly) overwhelming agedness?--Best wishes to everyone!
“I quit. (Please tell me you love me.)”
“We love you!”
“I am here.”
Professor Wolff --
A voice from Whoville: "We're here! You can't quit -- you are too legit to quit!"
-- Jim
I don't want to be selfish and demand more than you are willing to give, but
I would miss you very much dear Prof. I check your blog almost every morning and your short comments about the state of things always make me think.
I think you are a rarity, a philosopher who so intertwines his own life and his own thinking.... I can hardly think of anyone.
I have been gone for awhile dealing with many pressing issues and I was prepared to settle in and absorb the Professor's commentary.
To quote our fearless leader, "Sad."
But I must say, my only real surprise is that the Professor has lasted this long. Renoir, when a very young student in the studio of a Salon master whom he wasn't especially fond of, found himself on the receiving end of a lecture: "Mr. Renoir, you are painting as though you are amused." "Sir," responded Renoir, "were I not amused I wouldn't be painting."
Still here.
The suggestion to turn off the comments could work. But maybe it is best if you simply pretend you are the NYTs. That is, only a few letters to the editor ever find their way into print. The reality that only germane and thoughtful commentary (as determined by you), would get published, I think, would eliminate the offenders and focus the commentary.
Blogging should always be enjoyable. If it's not, taking a step back is totally cool. Wishing you all the best!
couponsheaven.com
So he has "left" in the past already?
Anonymous @ 7:04am: He quits periodically, frustrated, I think, that a blog is not like a classroom in which he has control and is entitled to undivided attention. It may be that this is why his followers here refer to him as "the Professor". (I know of no other blog run by an academic or former academic in which that title is used, almost religiously, by commenters. If any longtime followers can enlighten me on this odd convention, please do!)
Anonymous,
I'd say that some of us refer to RPW as "Professor" or "the Professor" because most of us are older, many of us over 75 like myself, and back when we were in college, we always addressed our professors as "Professor X" and referred to them when speaking about them to others as "the Professor". Professors wore ties and jackets and addressed their students as "Mr.", for example, "Mr. Wallerstein".
Lots of students wore ties and jackets to class. I didn't, being a bit of a rebel, but my freshman room-mate always did.
So when dealing with RPW in this blog many of us tend to regress to our college days, now almost 60 years ago, in a setting that was much much more formal than higher education today.
I'm not claiming that there is anything special or superior about those days, only that one is prisoner of one's youth the rest of one's life.
The question of how to refer to the professor came up a few years ago. I decided to refer to the professor as 'the professor' as a way of expressing the mixture of respect and affection that I feel towards the professor. An additional benefit is that when I make a remark as 'anonymous' I refer to the professor otherwise so that no one will suspect it's me.--Oops.
Anonymous @5:51 pm
He has said here in the past that he prefers to be addressed with that title as opposed to some other alternatives. I use "Prof. Wolff" or occasionally his initials.
Post a Comment