In a message dated 8/12/2010 5:49:04 P.M., wokshevs@xxxxxx writes: Just a minor historical note. Robert is too young, of course, to know about these earlier versions of phil. and pop culture, but I'm sure the 45+ crowd on the List will remember the following. Try to think back to them ol' days and see if you can identify the philosophical issues raised within the following programmes. Or not. ---- I seem to have been the only one who actually followed McCreery's LINK about the Spider man. The phrase is not HIS. The BBC article actually has that collocation, "teaching philosophy WITH Spider-Man". The link was actually pretty interesting. It has quotations from some lecturers. They pose some arguments. Actually some of their arguments are BORING. One said: (words to the effect): "Note that I'm not teaching the PHILOSOPHICAL claims of Spider Man. I'm USING Spider Man to illustrate the good old philosophical problems". So it's like Palma's Bullshit and philosophy all over again. ------ I never read "Spider Man" nor I think I'll read it. The BBC essay was mainly about cartoons. I do think cartoons ARE the way to go to illustrate "implicature". Philosophy at large, I don't know. One interviewee mentioned, words to the effect, "What I do is analytic philosophy; and surely what examples I use is recherche. I just use Spider Man to pose a philosophical question." The authors interviewed -- all members of the philosophy dept. faculty -- were keen to distinguish their approach with that of 'cultural studies'. They were just doing 'philosophy' using examples other than Descartes's "Metaphysical Meditations" and such. ---- I think the BBC essay is "Canadian" based. It would be ridiculous to take that BBC essay seriously in OXFORD -- where "Grice" rules! Speranza Bordighera