Ethnocentrism and Multiculturalism in Contemporary
Philosophy
Brian Bruya
Philosophy East and West, Volume 67, Number 4, October 2017, pp. 991-1018
(Article)
Published by University of Hawai'i Press
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/pew.2017.0086
For additional information about this article
https://muse.jhu.edu/article/673988
Access provided by Northwestern University Library (3 May 2018 17:24 GMT)
Ethnocentrism and Multiculturalism in Contemporary Philosophy
Brian Bruya
Department of History and Philosophy, Eastern Michigan University
[email protected]
Introduction
There has recently been much talk of the dangers of implicit bias and speculation
about how to diminish it.1 I took a couple of the implicit bias tests on the Harvard
website2 — tests on bias toward women and toward African Americans — and found
to my dismay that I am not as unbiased as I would hope to be. My own implicit bias
can have significant ramifications toward my colleagues and co-workers and especially toward my students — I don’t want my personal biases to negatively influence
their education. Similarly, we wouldn’t want any such kind of bias, scaled up to the
level of the profession, to hamper progress in the profession.
We call bias in regard to gender “sexism,” against other races “racism,” and
against other ethnic groups “ethnocentrism.” There is a fairly strong recent movement
in philosophy to help reduce and remediate sexism.3 There are also strong calls recently across universities, not just in philosophy, for more diversity among faculty.4
Increasing diversity among faculty is generally understood as increasing representativeness of identities, which includes race and ethnicity — to ensure that identities
of the faculty more accurately reflect those of society more broadly. I would like
to suggest that something is left out of the push for diversity in university hiring,
particularly in the field of philosophy. In regard to its emphasis on identity of the
individual, it neglects the diversity of subject matter that the scholar may bring to
the university community. I’m speaking specifically of the lack of non-Western philosophy in the philosophy discipline. Imagine a philosophy program with twelve
full-time faculty of diverse identities and all twelve specializing in Aristotle. That
group of philosophers would very likely be great for Aristotle scholarship but
would, of course, drastically reduce the diversity of philosophy taught in the
program.
In what follows, I will make a case for diversifying philosophy in regard to subject matter. I’ll do this in several steps. First I will motivate the project by describing
a certain generic model of ethnocentrism. Like the implicit bias project, this model
of ethnocentrism demonstrates a depressing fact about human decision making, but
rather than leaving it at the level of the individual, it considers the effects of individual action at the level of the group. What is especially distressing about this model is
that the decision-making mechanism leverages the strategy of cooperation to implement exclusionism, thereby masking discrimination beneath the self-congratulatory
appearance of altruism. The second step will be to give a justification for the benefits of diversity in problem solving, drawing largely from the work of Scott Page, a
Philosophy East & West Volume 67, Number 4 October 2017 991–1018
© 2017 by University of Hawai‘i Press
991
specialist in political philosophy and complex dynamic systems. Next, I will highlight the benefits of multiculturalism at the individual level from the perspective of
experimental psychology. For this, I will draw on the work of psychologist Ying-yi
Hong 康
螢儀 among others. From these three mathematical and empirical resources,
I will conclude that increasing diversity in philosophy by increasing its multicultural
content is instrumentally desirable for students and for the profession. Having established the need for cultural diversity, I show how micromotives biased by ethnocentrism in philosophy are having macroeffects on the field. Finally, I suggest ways to act
to help promote cultural diversity in the field of philosophy.
I. Ethnocentrism
In a series of articles in the 1980s, Robert Axelrod demonstrated that in a world of
egoists (without central control), cooperation emerges as the most effective long-term
strategy for survival.5 On top of this, he shows, two hallmarks of winning cooperative
strategies are niceness (the willingness to cooperate from the outset) and forgiveness
(the willingness to cooperate even after being cheated). This was an apparent vindication for altruism and a major contribution to the burgeoning literature on the evolution of altruism in human society. A third component of the winning cooperative
strategy has received less attention. Axelrod called it provocability — the recognition
of being cheated and eventually, perhaps after attempts at forgiveness, withholding
cooperation. In a society of pure altruists, cohesion will disintegrate under the stress
of free-riders, hence the necessity of provocability and of sometimes withholding
cooperation. So altruism holds — but a qualified altruism.
In a small society, it is easy enough to recognize free-riders by their past actions,
but what about in a larger society, where a free-rider can cheat someone for the first
time and then move stealthily on to the next victim? More recently, Ross Hammond
has worked with Axelrod, modifying a key assumption in their modeling to reflect a
move from smaller societies to larger, or from isolated groups to societies of interactive groups.6 The results are revealing.
In his early agent-based models, Axelrod begins with the prisoner’s dilemma, in
which an agent has to choose to either cooperate with or defect from another agent.
Defection has the highest individual payoff but works only if the other agent attempts
to cooperate. It has a low payoff if the other agent also defects. Cooperation results
in the lowest possible score (zero) if the other agent defects, but pays off handsomely
if the other agent cooperates (see table 1). When the scenario is run repeatedly with
the same agents — called the iterated prisoner’s dilemma game — an optimal strategy
emerges. While in the short term defection may occasionally have the highest payoff and cooperation the lowest payoff, in the long-term cooperation proves to be
the most effective way to maximize gains for oneself, provided cheating can be
detected.
But what if cheating is not easily detectable? The change that Hammond and
Axelrod brought was to move from an iterated setup to a “one move” setup. After
992
Philosophy East & West
Table 1. Payoffs for choices in the prisoner’s dilemma. Adapted from Axelrod 1980
Player 2
Player 1
Cooperate
Defect
Cooperate
3, 3
0, 5
Defect
5, 0
1, 1
one move, each player has a chance of replicating and a chance of dying. The
next round then starts from scratch, with no memory of what occurred previously
and thus no way to detect cheaters. This change necessitated one more significant
change — each agent now has a tag that marks it as a member of a group (representing common culture, language, dress, or some other kind of in-group marker). So
now each agent can distinguish agents of their own kind from agents of other kinds.
In this setup, cooperation again emerges as the best strategy; but with no past and
no future, niceness, forgiveness, and provocability become irrelevant traits. Instead,
it becomes a question of inclusion versus exclusion, and the results are not as
encouraging.
Within each group the results are similar to the iterated prisoner’s dilemma —
cooperation pays — and because of this cooperative clusters form. In-groups grow by
working together. Encouraging so far, but these in-groups are vulnerable to cheaters,
and without a way to detect them the groups eventually destabilize and disintegrate.
Pure altruism collapses under the weight of free-riders. Something unexpected occurs, however. Under Hammond and Axelrod’s setup, in addition to pure altruists
and pure egoists, two other strategies are available, each of which discriminates ingroup from out-group. One is the traitor, who defects from members of the in-group
and cooperates with members of out-groups. The other is the ethnocentric, who
cooperates with the in-group and defects from members of out-groups. The unexpected result is that as the game progresses from one generation to the next, the
ethnocentric strategy proves the most successful.
The moral of this story is: form groups, cooperate with members of your own
group, and exclude members of other groups — balkanization as survival. The point
of Hammond and Axelrod’s work on this is to highlight a possible evolutionary
mechanism underlying inherent tendencies toward unjust group discrimination, such
as implicit bias. My point in describing it here is to demonstrate why we cannot
rely on the open-mindedness of the philosophy community to be naturally inclusive. There are forces acting against inclusion, one of which is inherent in each
individual — and that is to exclude the alien voice — and at its most visceral it can be
experienced as a matter of survival.7
To make this point more vivid, we can advert to a computer-generated agentbased simulation. This was created following Axelrod and Hammond by Uri
Wilensky8 in a software program of Wilensky’s creation called NetLogo.9 The
Brian Bruya
993
simulation uses different colored shapes to signify the four different kinds of agents
and their ethnicities. Shapes representing the four kinds of agents are:
Solid circle: the altruist — cooperates with everyone
Hollow square: the egoist — defects from everyone
g Solid square: the traitor — cooperates with members of out-groups and defects
from the in-group
Hollow circle: the ethnocentric — cooperates with the in-group and defects
from members of out-groups
n
c
The world these agents populate is a 51 x 51 wrap-around grid randomly populated
at the outset by these four kinds of agent groups, each of which occurs as one of four
distinct ethnicities — each represented by an arbitrary color: blue, green, yellow, and
red. Call this starting setup the ecosystem at maximal entropy. As one generation
advances to the next, clusters of colors self-organize, and the initial chaos transforms
into undulating blotches of color (see figures 1 and 2) (Black and white versions of
figures and colors appear in the print edition of this article. Color versions appear in
the electronic edition).
In addition to the visual depiction of the the evolution of the groups, the simulation provides a dynamic graph of the number of individuals of each kind of agent —
of each strategy (not each ethnicity). The colors of the lines of the graph denote
strategies as follows: Green (CC): the altruist (solid circle); Black (DD): the egoist
(hollow square); Yellow (DC): the traitor (solid square); Red (CD): the ethnocentric
(hollow circle) (see figure 3). At about 100 generations, there are clear clusters of
individual colors, and the numbers of individuals of each strategy begin to clearly
depart, with the ethnocentrics (red line on graph) winning, the altruists (green line)
second, and the traitors and egoists heading downward. By the 200th generation,
a clear discrepancy has arisen, with the ethnocentrics the clear winner and the
other three together at the bottom (see figure 4). If we let this run for two thousand
generations, the differences become only more stark, until the proportions fall into
a dynamic equilibrium, with the ethnocentrics standing at about 75 percent10 of the
total population.
The takeaway from Hammond and Axelrod’s evolution of ethnocentrisms is
recognition of a very basic force at work in human decision-making that is working against diversity of subject matter in the field of philosophy. Without recourse
to normally expected mechanisms such as reciprocity, reputation, conformity, or
leadership, each agent in the model acts individually, and, through interactive group
dynamics, in-group favoritism — that is, ethnocentrism — evolves as the dominant
strategy. From the perspective of members of the in-group, the cooperative behavior
on the part of the ethnocentric appears helpful, even self-sacrificing, and yet the
overall effect is rank balkanization. Even assuming pro-social motives, we cannot
infer a tendency toward an even distribution of goods over time. Axelrod and
Hammond’s model, assuming that it provides a legitimate insight into tendencies in
human decision-making, shows that there is a built-in drive toward exclusionism.
994
Philosophy East & West
Figure 1. Simulation at 102 generations.
Figure 2. Simulation at 201 generations.
Brian Bruya
995
Figure 3. Graph at 102 generations.
Figure 4. Graph at 201 generations.
996
Philosophy East & West
II. Diversity
What should philosophy programs look for when they hire? A common construal of
philosophy is that there are discrete philosophical problems (such as the mind-body
problem or the trolley problem), and philosophers spend their time trying to understand and solve them.11 There are also more open-ended approaches that consider
how philosophy may help refine, reconsider, complicate, or simplify problems, as
appropriate. Alternatively, some prefer to say that philosophy is more about asking
better questions than about solving discrete problems. Whichever way you look at it,
philosophers marshal intellectual resources and apply them to particular concerns.
I will use the shorthand moniker of “problem-solving” for this enterprise, understanding its broad range from direct applied models to more open-ended, aporetic, and
interrogative pursuits.
It makes sense to assume that the best way to solve a difficult problem is to
recruit some really smart people to work on it. Therefore, it seems to make sense for
philosophy programs to simply look for the smartest philosophers when hiring. In this
section, I follow Scott Page, who offers mathematical and empirical arguments for
the position that diversity trumps ability when it comes to solving difficult problems.
The push in universities currently is to increase identity diversity, specifically
with regard to race, ethnicity, and gender. The presumption is that identity diversity
will necessarily result in diversity of experience, perspectives, and personal narratives. Some members of minority groups understandably resist aspects of this presumption, however, and want to be known as scholars first, not as ethnic scholars.
For example, at a diversity panel at the Eastern APA in January 2016, a logician who
also happened to be Asian American protested against the presumption that philosophers of Asian heritage should necessarily be interested in Asian philosophy.
Page distinguishes identity diversity from cognitive diversity, by which he means
a diverse set of cognitive tools, including perspectives and heuristics. Perspectives,
Page says, are “internal representations of problems,” and heuristics are “algorithms
used to locate solutions.”12 I submit that no argument is necessary to conclude that
non-Western traditions will bring diverse perspectives and heuristics to bear on current problems in philosophy — but more on multiculturalism below. For now, we
must ask how Page concludes that diversity trumps ability. Page’s preferred method
is something called computational experimentation — like the agent-based modeling
above. Page teamed up with the mathematical economist Lu Hong to create a formal
mathematical proof.13 Their highly complex mathematical methods are beyond the
scope of this article, but the idea can be stated fairly easily, and a couple of examples
should suffice.
This idea is this. If ten really smart people try to solve a difficult problem from the
same perspective and with the same heuristics, it is not much different from one really smart person trying to solve the problem. They will all construe it more or less
the same way, take the same route, and get stuck in the same places. They may very
well get to the solution, but they may just as well get stuck at some point distant from
it. Now remove nine of those people and add in nine merely smart people but with
Brian Bruya
997
distinct perspectives and heuristics, and you have that many more perspectives on
the problem and that many more opportunities to come to a correct solution. Where
one gets stuck, another may find a way around.14 They don’t all have to be the best
because they have their own unique tools to contribute to the project. The diverse
group won’t get the best answer every time, but on average, it will outperform the
smarter group.15
To demonstrate this point, let’s look at a real-life example. In 2009, Cambridge
University mathematician and Fields Medal winner Timothy Gower used his personal blog to invite anyone interested to collaborate in solving an unsolved problem in mathematics, specifically, “a combinatorial proof of the density version of
the Hales-Jewett theorem.”16 He called the project Polymath. Almost immediately,
Terrence Tao, a UCLA mathematician and himself a Fields Medal winner, joined up.
Together, Gowers and Tao accounted for almost half of all contributions to the subsequent group collaboration. And although they were the two smartest people “in the
room,” they did not solve the problem on their own. In all, there were thirty-nine
participants, ranging from high school math teachers to graduate students to university professors. Comments by contributors were ranked by each other in importance,
and there was no correlation between seniority and importance of highest ranked
comment for each contributor,17 showing that without diversity, the problem would
not so easily have been solved. Ten subsequent Polymath projects have been
launched, resulting in at least three more solutions.18 There are now six publications
under the collective pseudonym D.H.J. Polymath.
The Polymath projects are a kind of crowdsourcing, a practice that has become
popular since the rise of Wikipedia. Another problem solved through crowdsourcing
was the shape of a specific enzyme that had stumped experts for ten years and which
a crowd of non-specialists managed to solve in three weeks.19 The idea of crowdsourcing itself has its origins in the so-called wisdom of the crowd, which goes back
to the unlikely source of Francis Galton, the man who coined the term “eugenics”
and who hoped to prove that certain people — most people — were unfit for participation in a democratic society.20 Galton stumbled upon a contest at a local fair to
judge the weight of the meat of an ox. After the contest, Galton collected all 787
guesses and computed the average. Together, the crowd was just one pound off. To
his credit, Galton published his results.21
Since Galton, there have been many reproductions of his findings in a wide
variety of experiments. James Surowiecki popularized the idea in his best-selling
book The Wisdom of the Crowds. Crowds are not necessarily diverse, but the underlying mathematical feature that gives crowds in general their advantage, as Hong and
Page show, is diversity where it occurs. From this perspective, there seems to be wide
agreement that diversity trumps ability.
As I said, Page shows that what accounts for the success of diverse groups is the
variety of perspectives and heuristics, and in the following section I will discuss how
individuals can accrue multiple perspectives and heuristics. Before doing that, however, I want to introduce a study that links this section on the benefits of diversity
998
Philosophy East & West
back to section one on ethnocentric tendencies. Ethnocentrics not only want to help
their own kind; they also want to keep “the other” out. What happens when the other
is allowed in but does not differ in terms of perspective or heuristics?
Katherine Phillips, Katie Liljenquist, and Margaret Neale conducted an experiment in which small groups were composed of either fraternity or sorority members
and were tasked with solving a difficult problem.22 Groups of three were meticulously
formed in which members strongly identified with each other and either agreed with
each other in regard to the solution to the problem or did not agree with each other.
Then a fourth member was introduced. The fourth member, who either agreed or
disagreed with members of the group, also either was or was not a member of the
same sorority or fraternity. From self-reports, the in-group / out-group identification
difference was quantitatively stark, so there was clearly a sense of homogeneity versus diversity in the minds of the participants, and yet since they were all members of
the Greek system, real diversity (as commonly construed) was negligible. In the end,
the groups that perceived themselves as homogeneous fared poorly compared to the
groups that perceived themselves as diverse. The diverse groups were much more
likely to reconsider their opinions and come to the correct solution after the introduction of the out-group member, whereas the groups that perceived themselves as
homogeneous were more likely to continue on their wrong course. Tellingly, however, the homogeneous groups reported their interactions as more effective and were
more confident in their solutions than the diverse groups.
This study shows that, setting aside the real benefits of diversity in terms of cognitive tools, the mere inclusion of perceived outsiders sparks constructive skepticism,
even if the process may not necessarily be perceived as constructive. And what is
frightening but perhaps not surprising is that the homogeneous groups, such as the
ethnocentrics in section one, do worse but are confident that they do better.
III. The Multicultural Mind
The models and studies elucidated above point to an inherent human tendency
toward ethnocentrism and an argument for increasing diversity. The argument for
diversity relies on the pragmatic advantages of diverse perspectives and heuristics in
problem-solving. It seems safe to assume that multiculturalism can provide the necessary differences in perspectives and heuristics. In fact, I suggested as much above.
But we need not settle for this assumption because there is evidence to support the
inference. There are two parts in putting together the evidence. The first is to demonstrate a phenomenon called the “multicultural mind,” and the second is to show that
the multicultural mind has certain advantages in problem-solving.
A common approach to cultural studies is to view cultures as having essences —
general characteristics that define a culture and that help one understand the behavior of agents in that culture. This view is supported by a large body of literature
in cross-cultural psychology conducted by researchers such as Richard Nisbett,
Shinobu Kitayama, and Hazel Markus. Gradually, however, this view is giving way to
Brian Bruya
999
a more dynamic view in which culture is understood as a resource, or as a means.
Chi-yue Chiu and Ying-yi Hong, for example, say, “People are not passive carriers
of culture. Instead, they express and exercise agency via culture, and apply cultural
knowledge flexibly and discriminatively across situations. . . . Culture can be compared to a toolkit that can be put to manifold uses.”23 The easiest way to grasp the
idea of the multicultural mind is to observe the behavior of bicultural individuals,
“people who have internalized two cultures.”24
Self-reports and objective studies have shown that bicultural individuals possess
simultaneous sets of domain-specific categories and implicit theories that are used
separately and not simultaneously to interpret cues and prompt cognition and behavior.25 For example, given an ambiguous motive in an agent, a typical Chinese
person will attribute a collectivist motive, a typical American person will attribute an
individualist motive, and a Chinese American bicultural individual will attribute a
collectivist or individualist motive depending on contextual cues.26
Intraperson diversity in bicultural individuals — the multicultural mind — has payoffs in terms of problem-solving and creativity. Carmel Saad and colleagues27 found
that bicultural individuals scored higher on a standard creativity test than monocultural individuals. The underlying cause was found to be an increase in ideational
fluency, or the generativity of novel, context-relevant ideas — just the kind of thing
that Page suggested as a way to more effective problem-solving. According to Saad
and colleagues, their “findings indicate that contexts that facilitate the perceived and
real blending of cultures . . . (e.g., multicultural education) . . . may enhance the creativity of its individuals.”28
Malgorzata Gocłowska and Richard Crisp,29 in reviewing a large body of relevant cross-cultural and cognitive studies, conclude that multicultural minds allow
the “development of a broader idea base [which] should allow [individuals] to free
themselves from restraints associated with prototypical problem solutions available
within their initial group and enhance their chances of producing more creative and
innovative ideas.”30
Research on the multicultural mind is relatively new and has focused primarily
on how bicultural individuals differ from monocultural individuals. A major difference between the two is that bicultural people are also generally bilingual, but
Gocłowska and Crisp also look at what they call dual-identity individuals, people
who identify with different cultures but who are not necessarily bilingual — for example, African Americans who navigate both black subculture and the predominant
American culture, third-generation Chinese Americans, and female engineers. In
each of these different kinds of cases, individuals need to be good at switching between distinct conceptual frameworks, involving specific terminology, concerns, and
norms. This kind of frame switching is thought to allow for “a wider range of semantic categories”31 that increases their creativity. As far as I know, there has not been
any research on how multicultural education may enhance creative problem-solving,
but it seems a short leap to infer that it would. Philosophy already prides itself on
expanding perspectives. To introduce a multicultural dimension would be a logical
step in the same direction.
1000
Philosophy East & West
IV. Preliminary Conclusion
In section one, I showed how it makes sense to view human beings as having a
natural tendency toward ethnocentrism. Because ethnocentric individuals appear
altruistic to the in-group, ethnocentrism is insidious in its self-congratulatory aspect.
In the second and third sections, I showed that the homogeneity of ethnocentrism is
pragmatically less productive than cultural diversity, and yet homogeneous groups
may have a false sense of confidence in their productivity. When we apply these
lessons to the field of philosophy, it should come as no surprise that not only are
non-Western cultures largely excluded from mainstream philosophy but that members of mainstream philosophy congratulate themselves on their own abilities and
think they are better off without the inclusion of these other traditions.32
This is the situation in which we find ourselves. Yes, the very people who are
supposed to excel at thinking abstractly and considering all angles of an issue objectively and penetratingly are working, in this case, from base instinct. And we should
not shy away from calling out this ethnocentrism. There are legitimate hurdles to the
inclusion of and use of non-Western philosophical traditions in the academy, but
they should be viewed as challenges to be overcome, not as excuses to preserve a
bigoted status quo.
Before concluding, I want to highlight continuing obstacles to progress and recommend paths to achieving a remedy.
V. The Micromotives and Macroeffects in Philosophy
Philip Quinn once said that when a graduate program in philosophy aspires to
improve its visibility among philosophers and graduate students, it will naturally
carve out a niche for itself in unrepresented specialties.33 I think that this force does,
indeed, exist, especially when there are opportunities in the job market for graduates
in such unrepresented fields. So why isn’t it happening in non-Western philosophy?
The job market in non-Western philosophy in undergraduate institutions is good.34
In fact, the University of Hawai‘i’s philosophy program, which by a large margin
produces the most specialists in non-Western philosophy,35 has a tenure-track placement record rivaling those of the top universities in the country.36 Based on selfinterest alone, one would think that other Ph.D. programs would be setting up their
own niches in non-Western fields. On top of this, there is a huge push across universities for more multiculturalism, more diversity, and more globalization. It would
seem that the stars are all aligned for elite Ph.D. programs to create positions in
non-Western philosophy.
If ethnocentrism is indeed involved, how is it manifested? As we know from history, bigotry does not need to be overt in order to have widespread effects. It doesn’t
even have to be structural in a concrete sense of law or policy. As economist Thomas
Schelling says, micromotives can affect macrobehavior. Schelling wanted to model
how housing segregation arises in a city.37 It’s true that there were structural reasons
for segregation, such as so-called redlining rules. It’s also true that there was overt
Brian Bruya
1001
racism in the sense that some people didn’t want to live around people who were
unlike them and so would move away from certain areas as they grew more diverse.
But the numbers didn’t seem to add up. Schelling built a model to mimic human
behavior in terms of housing preferences and found something astonishing. If each
person in a community prefers on average that only 30 percent of their neighbors be
like them, the community will naturally arrange so that 70 percent of one’s neighbors
will be similar. In other words, a little bit of bias can result in a large social impact.
Figure 5 is an example of the model in which a preference for a mere 30 percent
homogeneity results in an actual 75 percent homogeneity. It doesn’t take an expert
in pattern-recognition to see the similarity with racial housing patterns in major
American cities, as shown in figures 6, 7, 8, and 9.38 According to Schelling’s model,
bigotry in a small number of individuals creates wide effects in the larger population.
Can this insight be applied to the field of philosophy? How much bias would it
take to marginalize non-Western philosophy and how might this be manifested? One
obvious place that it would manifest itself is in hiring practices, and one of the most
important influences in hiring practices is the Philosophical Gourmet Report (PGR).
It is reported that departments make hires with the aim of improving or maintaining their ranking in the PGR.39 The PGR categorizes philosophical specialties into
areas.40 The American Philosophical Association (APA) also maintains a list of philosophical specialties.41 It is revealing to compare the two lists, as in table 2 and figure
10. The PGR lists thirty-three specialties, while the APA lists sixty, and the APA’s
specialties are not narrow subcategories of the PGR’s specialties but are specialties
that the PGR does not recognize, such as philosophy of education, environmental
Figure 5. NetLogo model showing how a preference for 30 percent homogeneity (“similar-wanted”)
results in 75 percent similarity.
1002
Philosophy East & West
philosophy, and the many non-Western traditions. These are the specialties that a
job advertisement would list as AOS (“Area of Specialization”) or AOC (“Area of
Competence”). If the programs want to raise their rank in the PGR, it would be
counterproductive to hire in a specialty not listed in the PGR. This is how micromotives (e.g., raising a program’s PGR rank) can affect macrobehavior (the narrowing of specialties in the field broadly).
My 2015 article “Appearance and Reality in the Philosophical Gourmet Report”
examines the PGR from the standpoint of acceptable social science methodology
and finds the PGR to be severely flawed. Its most glaring flaw is that it uses a nonprobabilistic sampling procedure, meaning that those who complete the reputational
survey to evaluate philosophy programs are not selected randomly. Instead, Brian
Leiter arbitrarily chose some evaluators and then asked them to choose other evaluators, with no clearly stated criteria. A first-year Critical Thinking student could see
that the evaluator sample would be biased right from the start.
An example of this bias can be seen in the fact that 43 percent of evaluators
self-identify as working in a specialty associated with analytic metaphysics and epistemology. Just 4 percent identify as working in a marginalized field. And because the
entire slate of evaluators evaluates every philosophy program, even if a particular
Figure 6. Housing segregation in New York City. 2010 U.S. Census, Social Explorer, Google Maps (Bloch,
Cox, & Giratikanon 2015).
Brian Bruya
1003
philosophy program were packed with the best experts in non-Western philosophy,
those experts — and, therefore, that program — would be effectively invisible to the
evaluators. Such a program, although replete with the highest-regarded experts in
their fields, would not even make the PGR rankings.
We can see from the preceding that as long as philosophy programs use the PGR
to evaluate their programs, these programs will gradually come to resemble the ideal
program according to the PGR’s built-in biases. Drawing on the fact that any hire
made by a university philosophy program is an appropriation of resources, the article
concludes:
Any program that wishes to maintain its place in the PGR top 50, or to break into the
top 50, is incentivized to not hire in Chinese philosophy (or any already marginalized
specialty). Under this set of circumstances, a department head could go so far as to claim
a fiduciary responsibility not to hire in Chinese philosophy, as it would be a misappropriation of limited resources.42
In the PGR, we see micromotives in the form of implicit ethnocentrism. The PGR
is structured with an ethnocentric bias against non-Western philosophy, and the
micromotive to rank well in the PGR leads to a restructuring of programs around the
ethnocentric model that the PGR implicitly sets.
Figure 7. Housing segregation in Philadelphia. 2010 U.S. Census, Social Explorer, Google Maps (Bloch,
Cox, & Giratikanon 2015).
1004
Philosophy East & West
But the PGR is not the only example of ethnocentric bias in philosophy. There are
many others. For example, even though many programs have no specialist in
non-Western philosophy and therefore teach no non-Western philosophy, their programs never announce that they teach only Western philosophy. They may even
advertise themselves as being comprehensive or broad.43 Similarly, a typical ethics
syllabus, for example, in a typical philosophy department will not call attention to
the fact that the ethical theories discussed stem entirely from the Western tradition,
excluding all non-Western ethical theories. As a result, students graduate with degrees in philosophy believing that there is no philosophy outside the European tradition. Even in those programs that include a token amount of non-Western philosophy,
students come away thinking that philosophy is essentially a Western-only enterprise. If philosophical ethnocentrism was not there in the student to begin with, by
the end of the student’s education in philosophy it will have taken root.44
V. Action
What can be done? In the preceding sections, I have tried to demonstrate that philosophy programs will be better off with a diversity of subject matter. I have also shown
Figure 8. Housing segregation in Chicago. 2010 U.S. Census, Social Explorer, Google Maps (Bloch, Cox,
& Giratikanon 2015).
Brian Bruya
1005
that there are significant obstacles to achieving that objective and that even small
biases can have large effects. I think one can assume the best motives of most philosophers in programs across the country and even feel optimistic about the trends
toward diversity, multiculturalism, and globalization in academia, but none of that
will ensure the actual diversification of subject matter in philosophy programs. Latent
ethnocentrism, inertia, ignorance, human nature, and brute psychological and sociological facts are all working against diversification.
What is needed now is a joint political effort on the part of all scholars working
in non-Western philosophy — a lobby — something like a consortium for the advancement of multiculturalism in philosophy. Although non-Western philosophy is a small
slice of philosophy overall, a small vocal minority can produce changes in the field,
but only if they are organized. Below are three avenues in which such a consortium
could advocate for greater inclusion of non-Western philosophy.
1. Advocate for More Inclusion in the APA
We see in table 3 that while there has been progress in the inclusion of multicultural
content into the group program of the APA meetings, there has not been progress in
Figure 9. Housing segregation in Los Angeles. 2010 U.S. Census, Social Explorer, Google Maps (Bloch,
Cox, & Giratikanon 2015).
1006
Philosophy East & West
the main program, and perhaps even regress.45 Currently there are the following
multiculturally oriented APA committees:
Committee on Asian and Asian American Philosophers and Philosophies
Committee on Hispanics
Committee on Inclusiveness in the Profession.
Table 2. Comparison of PGR and APA philosophical specialties.
Area
M&E
Value
History
Other
PGR Specialties
Percent
APA Specialties
Percent
15
6
9
3
45
18
27
9
11
11
20
18
18
18
33
30
Figure 10. Comparison of PGR and APA philosophical specialties.
Table 3. Sessions with multicultural content at APA meetings over time.
Meeting
APA Eastern 1995
APA Eastern 2016
APA Pacific 2016
Main
Sessions
Sessions with
Multicultural
Content
54
80
167
5
3
7
Percent
Group
Sessions
Sessions with
Multicultural
Content
Percent
9
4
4
104
111
81
6
17
12
6
15
15
Brian Bruya
1007
This set should be expanded by adding some or all of the following:
Committee on African and Africana Philosophy
Committee on Buddhist Philosophy
Committee on Chinese Philosophy
Committee on Indian Philosophy
Committee on Islamic Philosophy
Committee on Japanese Philosophy
Committee on Latin American Philosophy
Committee on Multicultural Content in Philosophy
Similarly, in the Eastern division, there is an advisory committee to the main
program committee with representatives in the following particular areas of specialization:
Non-Western Philosophy
Africana
Latin American Philosophy
This list should also be expanded, with the inclusion of representatives of all of the
major world traditions, not just two of them.
The APA advocates for diversity and inclusion in the field but does not specifically advocate for inclusion of multicultural content. It is implicit in the current
format of committees, but it is easy to elide with identity inclusiveness. A drive toward
the inclusion of multicultural content should be made explicit.
Currently, nearly all of the multicultural content in APA meetings is delivered in
specialized panels devoted to non-Western topics, resulting in a kind of ghettoization of multiculturalism. In addition to the organizational suggestions above, members of these specialized panels need to have their opinions heard elsewhere during
the meeting, and it doesn’t have to be only as presenters. They should make a point
of attending other panels and asking uncomfortable questions from non-Western
perspectives. Even more importantly, they need to attend sessions devoted to diversity and the future of the profession. In the 2016 Eastern APA meeting, I attended two
panels at the tail end of the schedule — one titled “Priorities of Philosophy” and one
titled “Minorities and Philosophy.” Both panels were well attended by philosophers
concerned with changing the profession for the better, but as I looked around the
rooms, I did not see a single panelist from the many panels of non-Western philosophy that I had attended earlier in the conference. Multiculturalists can’t just wait
to be integrated. Anyone is welcome to attend these panels, and multiculturalists
should make their presence felt and their voices heard.
2. Be Active in Philosophical Societies
Another way to integrate is to seek representation on panels of other group societies
and in other specialized conferences. For example, at the January 2016 APA meeting,
1008
Philosophy East & West
the Society for Asian and Comparative Philosophy held a jointly sponsored panel
with the American Association of Philosophy Teachers (AAPT) on introducing nonWestern content into the curriculum. The AAPT was pleased to cooperate, and out of
that panel they arranged a special plenary panel on Asian and Comparative Philosophy at their biannual meeting the following summer. Similar cooperative ventures
can be arranged with societies like the International Society for Environmental Ethics,
the Society for Applied Philosophy, the Philosophy of Religion Group, the American
Society for Value Enquiry, the Society for the History of Political Philosophy, the
American Society for Aesthetics (ASA), the Society of Philosophers in America, and
so on. Some of these societies, like the AAPT hold their own regular conferences — for
example, the North American Society for Social Philosophy (NASSP), the American
Society for Aesthetics, and the International Society for Environmental Ethics (ISEE).
Each of these societies holds an annual meeting and would presumably welcome
papers from multicultural perspectives. According to its online program,46 the 2015
ISEE meeting had four presentations on African perspectives in three panels. That’s
great, but it had none on Asian perspectives. The ASA’s 2015 program47 shows no
papers on non-Western aesthetics.48 In the NASSP program from their 2015 meeting,
there are panels on indigenous justice, on tradition, and on race, but as far as I can
tell, no Asian content.49 I’m beginning to wonder if all of those non-Western panels
at the APA would be more productive in these smaller, more focused conferences
composed of more tight-knit communities. Non-Western societies who hold panels
at the APA should at least consider holding panels at some of these other annual
meetings.
3. Workshops for Introducing Non-Western Philosophy into the Curriculum
Part of the process of participating in other philosophical societies will be to educate them about multicultural content. This can be done through special panels on
infusing multicultural content into the curriculum. I mentioned already the special
plenary panel at the American Association for Philosophy Teachers’ annual meeting. The SACP also held another such panel at the 2016 APA Eastern meeting. Many
philosophers want to know more about how to diversify their syllabi, and there
are some suggestions online, but there is no substitute for meeting someone in
person, whom you are able to contact in the future and who can act as a reliable
resource.
Multiculturalists should set the following long-term goals, bold though they
be:
Multicultural content in every panel at every APA meeting
Multicultural integration into every philosophical society meeting
An article with multicultural content in every issue of every philosophical journal
There is a very strong push for diversity in philosophy right now, but without robust
multicultural content philosophy will never be truly diverse.
Brian Bruya
1009
Notes
1 – More than likely, the reader is already familiar with the phenomenon of implicit
bias. If not, a good place to start is Daniel Kelly and Erica Roedder, “Racial
Cognition and the Ethics of Implicit Bias,” Philosophy Compass 3, no. 3 (2008):
522–540. For technical details on the most popular method of measuring implicit bias — the Implicit Association Test, see Anthony G. Greenwald et al.,
“Understanding and Using the Implicit Association Test: III. Meta-Analysis of
Predictive Validity,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 97, no. 1
(2009): 17– 41, or see Brian A. Nosek, Anthony G. Greenwald, and Mahzarin R.
Banaji, “The Implicit Association Test at Age 7: A Methodological and Conceptual Review,” in J. A. Bargh, ed., Automatic Processes in Social Thinking and
Behavior (New York: Psychology Press, 2007), pp. 265–292. Implicit bias has
begun to be addressed in a number of fields, such as law ( John Tyler Clemons,
“Blind Injustice: The Supreme Court, Implicit Racial Bias, and the Racial Disparity in the Criminal Justice System,” American Criminal Law Review 51
[2014]: 689–713; Justin D. Levinson and Danielle Young, “Implicit Gender Bias
in the Legal Profession: An Empirical Study,” Duke Journal of Gender Law &
Policy 18, no. 1 [2010]: 1– 44), medicine (Gordon B. Moskowitz, Jeff Stone, and
Amanda Childs, “Implicit Stereotyping and Medical Decisions: Unconscious
Stereotype Activation in Practitioners’ Thoughts about African Americans,”
American Journal of Public Health 102, no. 5 [2012]: 996 –1001), and management (Philip E. Tetlock and Gregory Mitchell, “Implicit Bias and Accountability
Systems: What Must Organizations Do to Prevent Discrimination?” Research
in Organizational Behavior 29 [2009]: 3–38). Of course, it has not escaped
the notice of philosophers, either theoretically (Tamar Szabó Gendler, “On
the Epistemic Costs of Implicit Bias,” Philosophical Studies 156, no. 1 [2011]:
33– 63; Jules Holroyd, “Responsibility for Implicit Bias,” Journal of Social Philosophy 43, no. 3 [2012]: 274 –306) or practically within the profession ( Jennifer Saul, “Implicit Bias, Stereotype Threat, and Women in Philosophy,” Women
in Philosophy: What Needs to Change [Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2013], pp. 39– 60; Jennifer Saul, “Ranking Exercises in Philosophy
and Implicit Bias,” Journal of Social Philosophy 43, no. 3 [2012]: 256 –273).
2 – “Project Implicit,” https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit /aboutus.html (accessed
October 14, 2016).
3 – See, for example, Katrina Hutchison and Fiona Jenkins, eds., Women in Philosophy: What Needs to Change (New York: Oxford University Press, 2013); “APA
Committee on the Status of Women in Philosophy,” http://www.apaonlinecsw
.org (accessed September 20, 2016); Women in Philosophy Task Force, “What
Is It Like to Be a Woman in Philosophy?” https://beingawomaninphilosophy
.wordpress.com (accessed September 20, 2016); and Women in Philosophy Task Force, “What We’re Doing about What It’s Like,” https://
whatweredoingaboutwhatitslike.wordpress.com (accessed September 20, 2016).
1010
Philosophy East & West
4 – See, for example, Orlando Taylor et al., “Diversifying the Faculty,” Peer Review
12, no. 3 (2010): 15–18, and Colleen Flaherty, “More Faculty Diversity, Not on
Tenure Track,” Inside Higher Ed, August 22, 2016, https://www.insidehighered
.com/news/2016/08/22/study-finds-gains-faculty-diversity-not-tenure-track.
5 – Robert Axelrod, “Effective Choice in the Prisoner’s Dilemma,” Journal of Conflict Resolution 24, no. 1 (1980): 3–25; Robert Axelrod, “More Effective Choice
in the Prisoner’s Dilemma,” Journal of Conflict Resolution 24, no. 3 (1980):
379– 403; Robert Axelrod, “The Emergence of Cooperation among Egoists,”
American Political Science Review 75, no. 2 (1981): 306 –318.
6 – Ross A. Hammond and Robert Axelrod, “The Evolution of Ethnocentrism,”
Journal of Conflict Resolution 50, no. 6 (2006): 926 –936.
7 – For examples of xenophobic remarks from philosophers and their rationalizations, see Amy Olberding, “Philosophical Exclusion and Conversational Practices,” Philosophy East and West, this issue, pp. 1023–1037.
8 – Uri Wilensky, NetLogo Ethnocentrism Model (Evanston, IL: Center for Connected Learning and Computer-Based Modelling, Northwestern University,
2003).
9 – Uri Wilensky, NetLogo (Evanston, IL: Center for Connected Learning and
Computer-Based Modelling, Northwestern University, 1999).
10 – The 75 percent figure is Hammond and Axelrod’s. In the simulations using
NetLogo, it is more like 50 – 60 percent.
11 – “Philosophy: A Brief Guide for Undergraduates,” http://www.apaonline.org /
general/custom.asp?page=undergraduates (accessed September 22, 2016).
12 – Lu Hong and Scott E. Page, “Groups of Diverse Problem Solvers Can Outperform Groups of High-Ability Problem Solvers,” Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 101, no. 46 (November
16, 2004): 16385–16389.
13 – Lu Hong and Scott E. Page, “Problem Solving by Heterogeneous Agents,” Journal of Economic Theory 97, no. 1 (2001): 123–163; Hong and Page, “Groups of
Diverse Problem Solvers Can Outperform Groups of High-Ability Problem
Solvers,” pp. 16385–16389.
14 – Here is an example of what it means to get stuck on a problem. Consider the
following puzzle. Take the two words “tame” and “coiled.” An anagram of one
of these words is a synonym of the other word. Now solve. The best way to
proceed is to begin making anagrams of one word to see if any are synonyms of
the other. For example, “meat,” “mate,” and “team” from “tame,” but none is
synonymous with “coiled.” When I tried this puzzle, I immediately construed
“tame” as the verb “to tame.” With that understanding, I would never get the
answer and would be stuck in that perspective. It would take a shift in perspective to link up “docile” with “tame” as an adjective (puzzle from “Want to Find
Brian Bruya
1011
a Synonym? Better Get to Shufflin’,” http://www.npr.org /templates/transcript /
transcript.php?storyId=477092627 [accessed September 22, 2016]).
15 – Hong and Page, “Problem Solving by Heterogeneous Agents,” pp. 123–163;
Hong and Page, “Groups of Diverse Problem Solvers Can Outperform Groups
of High-Ability Problem Solvers,” pp. 16385–16389.
16 – Justin Cranshaw and Aniket Kittur, “The Polymath Project: Lessons from a Successful Online Collaboration in Mathematics,” CHI 2011: Proceedings of the
SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2011): 1868.
Several references that I use in this article were discovered by reading the work
of, and watching video lectures of, Scott Page, including references to Timothy
Gower; Phillips, Liljengquist, and Neale; and Robert Schelling. See, for example, the video of Page’s talk at UC, San Diego: Scott Page, “Beyond Numbers:
How Diversity Makes Us Better at What We Do,” March 4, 2013, https://www
.youtube.com/watch?v=bhVrNKGZ_0s (accessed October 14, 2016). See also
Page’s The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups,
Firms, Schools, and Societies (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2007).
I am indebted to Page for his brilliant overviews and concise explanations.
The explanations of the references here (along with any possible errors or
misconstruals) are my own.
17 – Justin Cranshaw and Aniket Kittur, “The Polymath Project: Lessons from a
Successful Online Collaboration in Mathematics.”
18 – Polymath Wiki, last modified January 29, 2016, http://www.michaelnielsen.org/
polymath1/index.php?title=Main_Page (accessed September 20, 2016); Polymath Blog, last modified August 13, 2016, https://polymathprojects.org (accessed
October 14, 2016).
19 – Leila Gray, “Gamers Succeed Where Scientists Fail,” UWNews, September 19,
2011, http://www.washington.edu/news/2011/09/19/gamers-succeed-wherescientists-fail.
20 – Francis Galton, “Chapter XXI: Race Improvement,” in Memories of My Life
(London: Methuen, 1908).
21 – Galton actually focused not on the mean (1,197 lbs.) but on the median (1,207
lbs.). See Francis Galton, “Letter to the Editor,” Nature 75, no. 1952 (March 28,
1907): 509–510.
22 – K. W. Phillips, K. A. Liljenquist, and M. A. Neale, “Is the Pain Worth the
Gain? The Advantages and Liabilities of Agreeing with Socially Distinct Newcomers,” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 35, no. 3 (March 2009):
336 –350.
23 – Chi-yue Chiu and Ying-yi Hong, “Cultural Competence: Dynamic Processes,”
in Handbook of Competence and Motivation, eds. Andrew J. Elliot and Carol S.
Dweck (New York: Guilford Publications, 2013), pp. 489–505.
1012
Philosophy East & West
24 – Ying-yi Hong et al., “Multicultural Minds: A Dynamic Constructivist Approach
to Culture and Cognition,” American Psychologist 55, no. 7 (2000): 709.
25 – Ibid.
26 – Ibid.
27 – Carmel S. Saad et al., “Multiculturalism and Creativity Effects of Cultural
Context, Bicultural Identity, and Ideational Fluency,” Social Psychological and
Personality Science 4, no. 3 (2013): 369–375.
28 – Ibid.
29 – Małgorzata A. Gocłowska and Richard J. Crisp, “How Dual-Identity Processes
Foster Creativity,” Review of General Psychology 18, no. 3 (2014): 216.
30 – Ibid.
31 – Ibid.
32 – Again, see Olberding, “Philosophical Exclusion and Conversational Practices.”
33 – Philip L. Quinn, “Pluralism in Philosophy Departments,” Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association 70, no. 2 (1996): 168–172.
34 – Brian Bruya, “The Tacit Rejection of Multiculturalism in American Philosophy
Ph.D. Programs: The Case of Chinese Philosophy,” Dao 14, no. 3 (2015): 369–
389.
35 – Ibid.
36 – See “Graduate School Philosophy Placement Records in the US and CA: Will
I Get a Job?” last modified October 2, 2013, http://www.philosophynews.com/
post /2013/10/02/ Will-I-get-a-Job-Graduate-School-Philosophy-PlacementRecords.aspx. (accessed September 21, 2016), in which the initial tenure-track
placement rate has been calculated for philosophy Ph.D. programs. The average
placement rate of the top twenty-five performing programs is 54 percent (the
University of Hawai‘i, for unknown reasons, was not included in the data set).
According to the same criteria used in the Carson study, one can derive the
placement rate of the University of Hawai‘i Department of Philosophy from
information on the department website (http://hawaii.edu/phil/people/alumni
[accessed September 20, 2016]) from 2004 (the earliest year on record) to
2010. The resultant initial tenure-track placement rate is 52 percent, right about
average for the top twenty-five programs.
37 – Thomas C. Schelling, “Dynamic Models of Segregation,” Journal of Mathematical Sociology 1, no. 2 (1971): 143–186.
38 – Matthew Bloch, Amanda Cox, and Tom Giratikanon, “Mapping Segregation,”
New York Times, July 8, 2015.
39 – Saul, “Ranking Exercises in Philosophy and Implicit Bias,” pp. 256 –273; Robin
Wilson, “Deep Thought, Quanitified,” Chronicle of Higher Education, sec. The
Brian Bruya
1013
Faculty, May 20, 2005; Zachary Ernst, “Our Naked Emperor: The Philosophical
Gourmet Report,” http://web.missouri.edu/~ernstz/Home_files/emperor-1.pdf
(accessed April 9, 2013); Richard Heck, “About the Philosophical Gourmet Report,” http://frege.brown.edu/heck/philosophy/aboutpgr.php (accessed April 9,
2013).
40 – Brian Leiter, “Description of the Report,” http://www.philosophicalgourmet
.com/2011/reportdesc.asp (accessed June 12, 2013).
41 – For several years, the APA has conducted a “Meeting Evaluation and Climate
Survey” after the annual divisional meetings, one of the questions of which
asks respondents to identify their areas of specialization by choosing from a list.
See “APA Eastern Division Meeting Evaluation and Climate Survey,” https://
delaware.qualtrics.com/jfe3/form/SV_0ixwNjm3Nk1AtjD (accessed September
21, 2016).
42 – Bruya, “The Tacit Rejection of Multiculturalism in American Philosophy Ph.D.
Programs.”
43 – Bruya documents and critiques this phenomenon in ibid.
44 – Bruya documents and examines the lack of multicultural philosophy in American philosophy Ph.D. programs in ibid.
45 – There are not enough data points here to make a sound conclusion about a
trend, but hopefully it coheres with one’s intuitions about the situation.
46 – Konrad Ott, “Environmental Ethics between Action and Reflection: 12th
Conference of the International Society for Environmental Ethics,” International
Society for Environmental Ethics, http://www.isee2015.uni-kiel.de/iseedoks/
20150720-ConBook.pdf (accessed October 14, 2016).
47 – Andrew Kania, “The American Society for Aesthetics 73rd Annual Meeting,”
The American Society for Aesthetics, http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/aesthetics-online
.org /resource/resmgr/Files/73rd_conference/AnnualMtgProgram2015.pdf (accessed October 14, 2016).
48 – However, demonstrating their potential openness to non-Western perspectives,
the society’s journal published a special issue. See Susan L. Feagin (ed.), “Global
Theories of the Arts and Aesthetics,” Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 65,
no. 1 (2007). The society also offers a grant for curriculum diversification, and
they have a special Feminist Caucus. With enough interest, there is no reason
they could not also have a multicultural caucus and associated presentations at
their annual and division meetings.
49 – Except for possibly one paper written from a Daoist perspective. See Margaret Crouch, “32nd International Social Philosophy Conference: Education &
Social Justice,” North American Society for Social Philosophy, http://www
.northamericansocietyforsocialphilosophy.org /2015-annual-conferenceprogram (accessed October 14, 2016).
1014
Philosophy East & West
References
American Philosophical Association. “APA Eastern Division Meeting Evaluation and
Climate Survey.” https://delaware.qualtrics.com/jfe3/form/SV_0ixwNjm3Nk1AtjD.
Accessed September 21, 2016.
American Philosophical Association Committee on the Status of Women in Philosophy. “APA Committee on the Status of Women in Philosophy.” http://www
.apaonlinecsw.org. Accessed September 20, 2016.
Audi, Robert. “Philosophy: A Brief Guide for Undergraduates.” American Philosophical Association Committee on the Status and Future of the Profession, and American Philosophical Association Committee on Career Opportunities. http://www
.apaonline.org /general/custom.asp?page=undergraduates. Accessed September
22, 2016.
Axelrod, Robert. “Effective Choice in the Prisoner’s Dilemma.” Journal of Conflict
Resolution 24, no. 1 (1980): 3–25.
———. “The Emergence of Cooperation among Egoists.” American Political Science
Review 75, no. 2 (1981): 306 –318.
———. “More Effective Choice in the Prisoner’s Dilemma.” Journal of Conflict
Resolution 24, no. 3 (1980): 379– 403.
Bloch, Matthew, Amanda Cox, and Tom Giratikanon. “Mapping Segregation.” New
York Times, July 8, 2015.
Bruya, Brian. “Appearance and Reality in the Philosophical Gourmet Report: Why
the Discrepancy Matters to the Profession of Philosophy.” Metaphilosophy 46,
nos. 4 –5 (2015): 657– 690.
———. “The Tacit Rejection of Multiculturalism in American Philosophy Ph.D.
Programs: The Case of Chinese Philosophy.” Dao 14, no. 3 (2015): 369–389.
Carson, Andrew. “Graduate School Philosophy Placement Records in the US and CA:
Will I Get a Job?” http://www.philosophynews.com/post /2013/10/02/ Will-I-geta-Job-Graduate-School-Philosophy-Placement-Records.aspx. Accessed September 21, 2016.
Chiu, Chi-yue, and Ying-yi Hong. “Cultural Competence: Dynamic Processes.” In
Handbook of Competence and Motivation, edited by Elliot, Andrew J. and Carol
S. Dweck, 489–505. New York: Guilford Publications, 2013.
Clemons, John Tyler. “Blind Injustice: The Supreme Court, Implicit Racial Bias, and
the Racial Disparity in the Criminal Justice System.” American Criminal Law
Review 51 (2014): 689–713.
Cranshaw, Justin, and Aniket Kittur. “The Polymath Project: Lessons from a Successful
Online Collaboration in Mathematics.” CHI 2011: Proceedings of the SIGCHI
Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2011): 1865–1874.
Brian Bruya
1015
Crouch, Margaret. “32nd International Social Philosophy Conference: Education
& Social Justice.” North American Society for Social Philosophy. http://www
.northamericansocietyforsocialphilosophy.org /2015-annual-conferenceprogram. Accessed October 14, 2016.
Ernst, Zachary. “Our Naked Emperor: The Philosophical Gourmet Report.” http://
web.missouri.edu/~ernstz/Home_files/emperor-1.pdf. Accessed April 9, 2013.
Feagin, Susan L., ed. “Global Theories of the Arts and Aesthetics.” Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 65, no. 1 (2007).
Flaherty, Colleen. “More Faculty Diversity, Not on Tenure Track.” Inside Higher
Ed, August 22, 2016, https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/08/22/studyfinds-gains-faculty-diversity-not-tenure-track.
Galton, Francis. “Chapter XXI: Race Improvement.” In Memories of My Life. London:
Methuen, 1908.
———. “Letter to the Editor.” Nature 75, no. 1952 (March 28, 1907): 509–510.
Gendler, Tamar Szabó. “On the Epistemic Costs of Implicit Bias.” Philosophical
Studies 156, no. 1 (2011): 33– 63.
Gocłowska, Małgorzata A., and Richard J. Crisp. “How Dual-Identity Processes
Foster Creativity.” Review of General Psychology 18, no. 3 (2014): 216–236.
Gowers, Timothy. Polymath Blog. https://polymathprojects.org. Accessed September
20, 2016.
———. Polymath Wiki. http://www.michaelnielsen.org /polymath1/index.php?title=
Main_Page. Accessed September 20, 2016.
Gray, Leila. “Gamers Succeed Where Scientists Fail,” UWNews (September 19,
2011). http://www.washington.edu/news/2011/09/19/gamers-succeed-wherescientists-fail. Accessed September 20, 2016.
Greenwald, Anthony G., Mahzarin R. Banaji, and Brian A. Nosek. “Project Implicit.”
https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit /aboutus.html. Accessed October 14, 2016.
Greenwald, Anthony G., T. Andrew Poehlman, Eric Luis Uhlmann, and Mahzarin R.
Banaji. “Understanding and Using the Implicit Association Test: III. Meta-Analysis
of Predictive Validity.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 97, no. 1
(2009): 17–41.
Hammond, Ross A., and Robert Axelrod. “The Evolution of Ethnocentrism.” Journal
of Conflict Resolution 50, no. 6 (2006): 926 –936.
Heck, Richard. “About the Philosophical Gourmet Report.” http://frege.brown.edu/
heck/philosophy/aboutpgr.php. Accessed April 9, 2013.
Holroyd, Jules. “Responsibility for Implicit Bias.” Journal of Social Philosophy 43,
no. 3 (2012): 274 –306.
Hong, Lu, and Scott E. Page. “Groups of Diverse Problem Solvers Can Outperform
Groups of High-Ability Problem Solvers.” Proceedings of the National Academy
1016
Philosophy East & West
of Sciences of the United States of America 101, no. 46 (November 16, 2004):
16385–16389.
———. “Problem Solving by Heterogeneous Agents.” Journal of Economic Theory
97, no. 1 (2001): 123–163.
Hong, Ying-yi, Michael W. Morris, Chi-yue Chiu, and Veronica Benet-Martinez.
“Multicultural Minds: A Dynamic Constructivist Approach to Culture and Cognition.” American Psychologist 55, no. 7 (2000): 709–720.
Hutchison, Katrina, and Fiona Jenkins, eds. Women in Philosophy: What Needs to
Change. New York: Oxford University Press, 2013.
Kania, Andrew. “The American Society for Aesthetics 73rd Annual Meeting.” The
American Society for Aesthetics. http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/aesthetics-online.org /
resource/resmgr/Files/73rd_conference/AnnualMtgProgram2015.pdf. Accessed
October 14, 2016.
Kelly, Daniel, and Erica Roedder. “Racial Cognition and the Ethics of Implicit Bias.”
Philosophy Compass 3, no. 3 (2008): 522–540.
Leiter, Brian. “Description of the Report.” http://www.philosophicalgourmet.com/
2011/reportdesc.asp. Accessed June 12, 2013.
Levinson, Justin D., and Danielle Young. “Implicit Gender Bias in the Legal Profession: An Empirical Study.” Duke Journal of Gender Law & Policy 18, no. 1 (2010):
1–44.
Moskowitz, Gordon B., Jeff Stone, and Amanda Childs. “Implicit Stereotyping and
Medical Decisions: Unconscious Stereotype Activation in Practitioners’ Thoughts
about African Americans.” American Journal of Public Health 102, no. 5 (2012):
996 –1001.
Nosek, Brian A., Anthony G. Greenwald, and Mahzarin R. Banaji. “The Implicit
Association Test at Age 7: A Methodological and Conceptual Review.” In J. A.
Bargh, ed., Automatic Processes in Social Thinking and Behavior (New York:
Psychology Press, 2007), pp. 265–292.
Olberding, Amy. “Philosophical Exclusion and Conversational Practices.” Philosophy East and West 67, no. 4 (2017): 1023–1037.
Ott, Konrad. “Environmental Ethics between Action and Reflection: 12th Conference of the International Society for Environmental Ethics.” International Society
for Environmental Ethics. http://www.isee2015.uni-kiel.de/iseedoks/20150720ConBook.pdf. Accessed October 14, 2016.
Page, Scott. “Beyond Numbers: How Diversity Makes Us Better at What We Do.”
Video lecture, March 4, 2013. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhVrNKGZ_0s.
Accessed October 14, 2016.
———. The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms,
Schools, and Societies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2007.
Brian Bruya
1017
Phillips, K. W., K. A. Liljenquist, and M. A. Neale. “Is the Pain Worth the Gain?
The Advantages and Liabilities of Agreeing with Socially Distinct Newcomers.”
Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin 35, no. 3 (March 2009): 336 –350.
Quinn, Philip L. “Pluralism in Philosophy Departments.” Proceedings and Addresses
of the American Philosophical Association 70, no. 2 (1996): 168–172.
Saad, Carmel S., Rodica Ioana Damian, Verónica Benet-Martínez, Wesley G. Moons,
and Richard W. Robins. “Multiculturalism and Creativity Effects of Cultural
Context, Bicultural Identity, and Ideational Fluency.” Social Psychological and
Personality Science 4, no. 3 (2013): 369–375.
Saul, Jennifer. “Implicit Bias, Stereotype Threat, and Women in Philosophy.” Women
in Philosophy: What Needs to Change, pp. 39– 60. Oxford and New York: Oxford
University Press, 2013.
———. “Ranking Exercises in Philosophy and Implicit Bias.” Journal of Social Philosophy 43, no. 3 (2012): 256 –273.
Schelling, Thomas C. “Dynamic Models of Segregation.” Journal of Mathematical
Sociology 1, no. 2 (1971): 143–186.
Shortz, Will, and Melissa Block. “Want to Find a Synonym? Better Get to Shufflin’.”
http://www.npr.org /templates/transcript /transcript.php?storyId=477092627. Accessed September 22, 2016.
Taylor, Orlando, Cheryl Burgan Apprey, George Hill, Loretta McGrann, and Jianping
Wang. “Diversifying the Faculty.” Peer Review 12, no. 3 (2010): 15–18.
Tetlock, Philip E., and Gregory Mitchell. “Implicit Bias and Accountability Systems:
What Must Organizations Do to Prevent Discrimination?” Research in Organizational Behavior 29 (2009): 3–38.
University of Hawai‘i Department of Philosophy. http://hawaii.edu/phil/people/alumni.
Accessed September 20, 2016.
Wilensky, Uri. NetLogo. Evanston, IL: Center for Connected Learning and ComputerBased Modelling, Northwestern University, 1999.
———. NetLogo Ethnocentrism Model. Evanston, IL: Center for Connected Learning
and Computer-Based Modelling, Northwestern University, 2003.
Wilson, Robin. “Deep Thought, Quantified.” Chronicle of Higher Education, May
20, 2005, sec. The Faculty.
Women in Philosophy Task Force. “What Is It Like to Be a Woman in Philosophy?”
https://beingawomaninphilosophy.wordpress.com/. Accessed September 20,
2016.
———. “What We’re Doing about What It’s Like: Making Things Better for
Women in Philosophy.” https://whatweredoingaboutwhatitslike.wordpress.com/.
Accessed September 20, 2016.
1018
Philosophy East & West