<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Beckwith Tenure Denial: Evidence?</title>
	<link>http://www.rasmusen.org/x/2006/04/12/beckwith-tenure-denial-evidence/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 23 Nov 2008 12:38:10 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.rasmusen.org/x/2006/04/12/beckwith-tenure-denial-evidence/#comment-11604</link>
		<author>Anonymous</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Apr 2006 13:43:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.rasmusen.org/x/2006/04/12/beckwith-tenure-denial-evidence/#comment-11604</guid>
		<description>Admin note: A reader asked me to post this, having had trouble with the comment mechanism. If anybody else has trouble, please do email me at erasmuse@indiana.edu, at least so I'll know something needs fixing. 
 
  1.. The granting of tenure is indeed measured by more than just how smart
a fellow is and the number of words he has written. And surely any
consideration of whether a tenure case has been decided fairly must also
take into account the academic tenor of the institution making the decision.

  So making an informed judgment would require taking a hard look at the
quality of the presses and journals that Beckwith has published with, as
well as the records of his peers at Baylor. This would surely be better than
an "inclination" to doubt Beckwith's case based upon the word of that
ever-so-objective and fair-minded observer, Brian Leiter.

  Speaking of Leiter, he rightly makes note of his work being published by
Cambridge Press. Rumor has it Cambridge is a high quality establishment.
Beckwith's latest book is being published by . . . Cambridge University
Press. They must think more highly of Beckwith than Professor Leither does.
I'm inclined to trust them more than I do Professor Leiter, but you and your
readers can make your own judgment on that score.

  Beckwith's other publications can be found here:
http://www3.baylor.edu/~Francis_Beckwith/publications.html.

  The list includes articles published in journals at Harvard, Notre Dame,
various respectable law schools, Baylor's own Journal of Church and State,
and various religious journals. While it's undoubtedly the case that Leiter
and those who share his philosophical outlook would look down on many of the
religious outlets, surely Baylor has no warrant to do so.

  And that's really the rub. Beckwith's record is far and away in the very
top tier of professors currently at Baylor. He has published in a range of
venues, and that range includes excellent presses and journals, and many
mid-range journals. While I suppose one could quibble over what counts as
"low-quality", I submit that a fair reading of the works cited in the link
above, along with a consideration of Baylor's standing in academia, would
put the burden of proof back upon those who deny Beckwith a place at Baylor.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Admin note: A reader asked me to post this, having had trouble with the comment mechanism. If anybody else has trouble, please do email me at <a href="mailto:erasmuse@indiana.edu">erasmuse@indiana.edu</a>, at least so I&#8217;ll know something needs fixing. </p>
<p>  1.. The granting of tenure is indeed measured by more than just how smart<br />
a fellow is and the number of words he has written. And surely any<br />
consideration of whether a tenure case has been decided fairly must also<br />
take into account the academic tenor of the institution making the decision.</p>
<p>  So making an informed judgment would require taking a hard look at the<br />
quality of the presses and journals that Beckwith has published with, as<br />
well as the records of his peers at Baylor. This would surely be better than<br />
an &#8220;inclination&#8221; to doubt Beckwith&#8217;s case based upon the word of that<br />
ever-so-objective and fair-minded observer, Brian Leiter.</p>
<p>  Speaking of Leiter, he rightly makes note of his work being published by<br />
Cambridge Press. Rumor has it Cambridge is a high quality establishment.<br />
Beckwith&#8217;s latest book is being published by . . . Cambridge University<br />
Press. They must think more highly of Beckwith than Professor Leither does.<br />
I&#8217;m inclined to trust them more than I do Professor Leiter, but you and your<br />
readers can make your own judgment on that score.</p>
<p>  Beckwith&#8217;s other publications can be found here:<br />
<a href="http://www3.baylor.edu/~Francis_Beckwith/publications.html." rel="nofollow">http://www3.baylor.edu/~Francis_Beckwith/publications.html.</a></p>
<p>  The list includes articles published in journals at Harvard, Notre Dame,<br />
various respectable law schools, Baylor&#8217;s own Journal of Church and State,<br />
and various religious journals. While it&#8217;s undoubtedly the case that Leiter<br />
and those who share his philosophical outlook would look down on many of the<br />
religious outlets, surely Baylor has no warrant to do so.</p>
<p>  And that&#8217;s really the rub. Beckwith&#8217;s record is far and away in the very<br />
top tier of professors currently at Baylor. He has published in a range of<br />
venues, and that range includes excellent presses and journals, and many<br />
mid-range journals. While I suppose one could quibble over what counts as<br />
&#8220;low-quality&#8221;, I submit that a fair reading of the works cited in the link<br />
above, along with a consideration of Baylor&#8217;s standing in academia, would<br />
put the burden of proof back upon those who deny Beckwith a place at Baylor.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: randy</title>
		<link>http://www.rasmusen.org/x/2006/04/12/beckwith-tenure-denial-evidence/#comment-11578</link>
		<author>randy</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Apr 2006 21:00:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.rasmusen.org/x/2006/04/12/beckwith-tenure-denial-evidence/#comment-11578</guid>
		<description>I don't think it's so easy to look at the quality of the journal in which an article is published, if the subject of those articles is anathema to the profession. My read (as an outsider) is that it is impossible for a scientific article that in any way supports ID to get a fair refereeing process.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s so easy to look at the quality of the journal in which an article is published, if the subject of those articles is anathema to the profession. My read (as an outsider) is that it is impossible for a scientific article that in any way supports ID to get a fair refereeing process.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hunter Baker</title>
		<link>http://www.rasmusen.org/x/2006/04/12/beckwith-tenure-denial-evidence/#comment-11576</link>
		<author>Hunter Baker</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Apr 2006 20:42:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.rasmusen.org/x/2006/04/12/beckwith-tenure-denial-evidence/#comment-11576</guid>
		<description>I have to add that if you will look at the MacMillan Encyclopedia of Philosophy, the majority of the article on abortion discusses Beckwith's work on the pro-life side of the equation.  He is a major voice on the subject of abortion, which is reflected by the upcoming Cambridge release.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have to add that if you will look at the MacMillan Encyclopedia of Philosophy, the majority of the article on abortion discusses Beckwith&#8217;s work on the pro-life side of the equation.  He is a major voice on the subject of abortion, which is reflected by the upcoming Cambridge release.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hunter Baker</title>
		<link>http://www.rasmusen.org/x/2006/04/12/beckwith-tenure-denial-evidence/#comment-11572</link>
		<author>Hunter Baker</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Apr 2006 20:12:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.rasmusen.org/x/2006/04/12/beckwith-tenure-denial-evidence/#comment-11572</guid>
		<description>I've never read your blog so I don't know if you are an academic, but if so, apparently not in the fields of philosophy and/or religion/politics.  Beckwith's C.V. is outstanding, which is readily admitted by virtually all parties at Baylor.  You saw the links at my blog, but did you somehow miss who is publishing Beckwith's latest book:  Cambridge University Press.  What is also impressive about Beckwith is the range of publication he has achieved.  Philosophy journals, bioethics journals, theology journals, law reviews, etc.  

And yes, since it will be brought up, I am his former graduate assistant.  But just to summarize, the quality of publication has never been in doubt by anyone in the process.  One might start by comparing Beckwith's publications to his peers at Baylor before issuing the kind of statements you've made here.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve never read your blog so I don&#8217;t know if you are an academic, but if so, apparently not in the fields of philosophy and/or religion/politics.  Beckwith&#8217;s C.V. is outstanding, which is readily admitted by virtually all parties at Baylor.  You saw the links at my blog, but did you somehow miss who is publishing Beckwith&#8217;s latest book:  Cambridge University Press.  What is also impressive about Beckwith is the range of publication he has achieved.  Philosophy journals, bioethics journals, theology journals, law reviews, etc.  </p>
<p>And yes, since it will be brought up, I am his former graduate assistant.  But just to summarize, the quality of publication has never been in doubt by anyone in the process.  One might start by comparing Beckwith&#8217;s publications to his peers at Baylor before issuing the kind of statements you&#8217;ve made here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
