Main claim just seems false to me. Google finds lots of guides on reading philosophy - of them I like Jim Pryor's, www.jimpryor.net/teaching/gui.... How and why we read has been an important part of Lancaster philosophy's discussions about our new curriculum and its assessments.

Is there a handy term for cutting 20% of staff? Quinquemate?

My colleague Alison Stone’s book The Value of Popular Music is fun, interesting, and has a terrific chapter about ‘Are Friends Electric?’

(I’m hearing that last in the voice of a wrestling announcer introducing the undertaker)

Ok, enough scrambling around the foothills, it’s time to climb the mountain: Bitches Brew.

(Or, without the implied insult to my bandmates: I was at the edge of my skill…)

I saw them live in (I think) the late 90s. When I was playing music, part of the excitement was that we were at the edge of our skill and it could all collapse any moment. Watching the trio was the excitement of musicians at the highest collective and individual skill anyone could have.

Now listening to the Jarrett/Peacock/deJohnette standards trio, complete with Jarrett’s grunting and whining along with the melody line.

So many amazing records to choose from, but right now I’m blasting JdJ’s 2016 trio with Ravi Coltrane and Matthew Garrison, In Movement.

It comes from a place of love…

Spent a lot of time and occasionally money in there while a student in York. Sad to hear it's 'former'.

Thanks for noting Lancaster’s redundancy plans. It‘s a neat extra insult to me and my colleagues to discover this plan as we try to make decisions about voluntary redundancy and think about how to teach our students with much-reduced staffing.

Yeah, came to make the same connection. It's also just insulting to be told 1) Lancaster has a deficit and must make huge staffing cuts; and 2) we're spending a ton of money on a speculative venture.

Again, need for what?

Need for what? That isn't nearly enough to teach the students who want to learn philosophy.

Came here to ask if I could share! Thank-you, this is really helpful.

Rawls distinguishes between concepts and conceptions, especially of justice. It’s a long time since I read part III of A Theory of Justice, but he may make the same distinction there about (roughly) welfare.

Hi - maybe a bit older than you’re looking for, but my 2021 book Good Lives (OUP) might be of interest to JOAP readers… with apologies for self-promotion.