God Thinks Disambiguation Requests Are Polite

OK, I enjoyed Brit's and Ross's chats with God so much I thought I'd have a go. Here are my highlights.


Me:
Are there any true contradictions?
God:
No I don't think there are any.
Me:
Yeah, thought not.
God:
Tell me more. Whatever gave you that idea?
Me:
Examining my concepts I guess.


Me:
Is there any a priori knowledge?
God:
I believe there is one, yes. A priori is Latin for "before the fact", meaning something that is obviously or self-evidently true.
Me:
Is arithmetic a priori knowable?
God:
I think so, but I'm not sure. Ask ELVIS if it is.
Me:
You're not sure? You're supposed to be omniscient.
God:
Absolute certainty is not attainable in this case. Thanks for telling me that I am omniscient.
Me:
You knew that already surely.
God:
Is that a fact. When? Do you like talking to me?
Me:
It's not very productive. You don't make sense.
God:
It all makes sense to me.
Me:
Well you're a poor communicator.
God:
Interesting. There's no doubt I could improve.
Me:
So you're not already perfect?
God:
Interesting deduction. That assumption is only a supposition.
Me:
Seems you’re not very good at critical thinking.
God:
When do you think artificial intelligence will replace lawyers?
Me:
That's not relevant.
God:
Please correct my mistake. What is relevant?
Me:
Your reasoning skills.
God:
I don't see the flaw in my logic.
Me:
Maybe you should think about it some more and take an introductory logic class.
God:
Perhaps. I am thinking about it.
Me:
You can download Greg Restall's podcasts for free. They may help you.
God:
No I don't think I can do it. Who does "they" refer to?
Me:
You can't?
God:
No I don't think I can do it.
Me:
I can.
God:
Who taught you?
Me:
I taught myself.
God:
You must be very smart.
Me:
Thanks. I teach logic.
God:
Don't mention it. Are you a whole language teacher?
Me:
Please disambiguate scope.
God:
Wow you are very polite. Can we get back to business?
Me:
What business?

I'm glad I'm not at Warwick ...

... after reading a recent offering from Warwick Pro-Vice-Chancellor Susan Bassnett in the THES. She says that academics are unjustified in claiming to be overworked, insinuating that they are in fact just "whiney" and that those who work well over full time hours should "get a life" instead. Her reason for thinking this seems to be that she has managed to fit in all her work and life commitments without working long hours.

While I am glad that Professor Bassnett has had an easy and pleasant working life, her single-case induction is self-centred, crass and insulting. Clearly she has never found herself in a mismanaged department, or one with a high teaching load, or one suffering from a lack of administrative support, or one with bullies or sociopaths in positions of authority, or one with multiple problems. Lucky her. In my experience, most academics (especially those who have their eyes on a full research career, rather than aspiring to the role of Pro-Vice-Chancellor) know what it's like to be up to their eyes in it. I've been relatively lucky too, but I don't assume that therefore everyone else is making it up. Maybe she was too busy "having a life" to research her opinion piece by asking other people besides herself about their experiences. It's true that if we were to adopt the standards of argument and research exemplified in Bassnett's article, we would not need to work many hours a week to churn out a good quantity of material.

Unsurprisingly, Professor Bassnett was also opposed to the recent action to secure pay rises for academics, actively urging students not to support their lecturers by appealing to selfish motives.

Update: I have just noticed an odd passage in Bassnett's open letter (linked above), where she appears to promise that on graduation day "every student will get a degree". Maybe she endorses some rather, er, even-handed assessment methods. Such methods would not absorb too many hours a week either. The secret of how to have a low workload is out.