, Volume 190, Issue 11, pp 1917–1936 | Cite as

Philosophy dedisciplined

  • Robert FrodemanEmail author


This essay offers a critique of disciplinary philosophy, the dominant form of academic philosophy in the United States and elsewhere across the twentieth century. It argues that disciplinary philosophy represents an aberration compared to the main tradition of two thousand years of Western philosophy. It describes the characteristics of a dedisciplined philosophy, and emphasizes that dedisciplining philosophy requires attention to be paid to the linked institutional and theoretical elements of philosophy. The essay bases its argument in part on the results of a survey sent to more than 500 philosophy departments across North America in the summer of 2010.


Twentieth century philosophy Disciplinarity Interdisciplinarity Institutional change 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Allenby B., Sarewitz D. (2011) The techno-human condition. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  2. Bordogna F. (2008) William James at the boundaries. Chicago University Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  3. Central Daily Times. (2011). Penn State: Proposed state cut ‘catastrophic’. Accessed 2 March 2012.
  4. Chronicle. (2011, May 3). U. of Texas board chairman calls for bigger, cheaper flagship. Chronicle of Higher Education.Google Scholar
  5. Etchison, H. (2011). Philosophy department would be saved in revised plan. The Rebel Yell, Accessed April 7, 2011, from
  6. Fiegener, M. K., NSF. (2009). Numbers of U.S. Doctorates awarded rise for sixth year, but growth slower, NSF 10-308, November 2009. Accessed 24 Sept 2012.
  7. Frodeman, R. (2007). The role of humanities policy in public science. In Public science in liberal democracies (pp. 111–120). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  8. Frodeman, R. (2010). Experiments in field philosophy. New York Times op-ed, part of the stone series. Accessed November 23, 2010, from
  9. Frodeman R. (2011) Interdisciplinary thinking and academic sustainability: Managing knowledge in an age of accountability. Environmental Conservation 38(1): 105–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Frodeman, R., Briggle, A., & Holbrook, J. B. (2012). Philosophy in the age of neoliberalism. Social Epistemology, 26(3&4), 18–36.Google Scholar
  11. Hall, G. S. (1879). Philosophy in the United States. Mind, 4(13), 89–105Google Scholar
  12. Hartford T. (2011) Adapt: why success always starts with failure. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Hrotic, S. (forthcoming). Survey of the philosophic discipline. Minerva.Google Scholar
  14. JBL Associates. (2008, December 2). Reversing course: The troubled state of academic staffing and the way forward. Washington, DC: American Federation of Teachers.Google Scholar
  15. Kitcher, P. (2011). Philosophy inside out. Metaphilosophy, 42(3), 248–260.Google Scholar
  16. Lewin, T. (2012). Harvard and M.I.T. team up to offer free online courses. New York Times. Accessed May 2, 2012, from
  17. Marchand P. (1998) Marshall McLuhan: The medium and the messenger. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  18. McCumber J. (2001) Time in a ditch: American philosophy and the McCarthy era. Northwestern University Press, Evanston, ILGoogle Scholar
  19. Newfield, C. (2009). Ending the budget wars: Funding the humanities during a crisis in higher education. Profession, 2009, 270–284.Google Scholar
  20. Nietzsche, F. (1886/2008). Beyond good and evil (trans: Kaufmann, W.). Wilder Publications.Google Scholar
  21. Patal, V. (2010). A&M system grades faculty—by bottom line. at Accessed 6 March 2012.
  22. Reisch G. A. (2005) How the Cold War transformed philosophy of science. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Repko A. F. (2008) Interdisciplinary research: Process and theory. Sage Publishing, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  24. Schmidt, J. (2010). Prospects for a philosophy of interdisciplinarity. In R. Frodeman, J. T. Klein, & C. Mitcham (Eds.), Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity (pp. 39–41). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Singer, P. W. (2009). Wired for war: The robotics revolution and 21st century conflict. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
  26. Taylor, M. C. (2010). Crisis on campus: A bold plan for reforming our colleges and universities. Knopf.Google Scholar
  27. Weissman, J. (2012). How in the world did college costs rise 15% in only two years? The Atlantic Monthly. Accessed 24 Sept 2012.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for the Study of InterdisciplinarityUniversity of North TexasCorinthUSA

Personalised recommendations