Cool Katz

Back in the Remnant driver’s seat, Jonah invites newly minted AEI fellow Joshua Katz onto ...

By

Back in the Remnant driver’s seat, Jonah invites newly minted AEI fellow Joshua Katz onto the program for a nerdtastic discussion of language and how free we are to use it. Inevitably, their conversation touches on Joshua’s departure from Princeton, cancel culture, and broader illiberalism in American life. But it also explores current issues in linguistics, how much we can really know about classical civilizations, and what “literally” actually means. Tune in to find out whether Socrates had it coming.

Show Notes:

– Joshua’s page at AEI

– Joshua: “Status and ‘Virtue’ at the Dalton School”

Keep reading with a free account
Create a free Dispatch account to keep reading Get Started ALREADY HAVE AN ACCOUNT? SIGN IN
By
Comments (19)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    Bill Dyer (aka Beldar)

    With due and sincere apologies for trotting out faux Latin to express a nevertheless heartfelt sentiment: Illegitimi non carborundum, Dr. Katz. Carry on.

    Collapse
  2. Avatar photo
    Calvin S.

    I thought the discussion about how pseudo-intelectualism has taken over academia was interesting. Students are required to be "well rounded"( have approved opinions) without becoming actual experts in a field of study. It's incredible that one is no longer required to learn Latin or Greek to earn a degree in Classics. I would certainly like to hear more about this problem.

    I also thought the discussion of the historiography of the ancient world and the primary source problem was interesting. I heard a conversation on EconTalk with Bret Devereaux where he said that modern historians must learn to drink from a firehose while classicists must sip slowly from a trickle. Maybe Jonah should have Devereaux or some other classicist on to talk more about it.

    Collapse
  3. Andreas Ohioensis

    Jonah, this might help answer your perennial question about Straussian esoteric readings. Although it concerns the "historians" rather than the "philosophers" of antiquity, it still gets at the fundamental Straussian assertion:

    Anthony Kaldellis, “How Perilous Was It to Write Political History in Late Antiquity?,” Studies in Late Antiquity 1, no. 1 (February 1, 2017): 38–64, https://doi.org/10.1525/sla.2017.1.1.38.

    Collapse
  4. Ron Croxton

    Literally the best podcast interview with a linguist I've ever listened to.

    Collapse
  5. Avatar photo
    Cthocas

    My heart began to sing when the word "philology" was uttered.

    Collapse
  6. Avatar photo
    Todd T

    I’m glad this guy found a platform to air his grievances. But it got pretty tiresome.

    Collapse
  7. Avatar photo
    hajaXavier

    I literally 💩ed my pants listening to this dorkfest!

    To be clear, this is literally the one and only time I've ever used literally this way. 🤣🤣

    Collapse
  8. Avatar photo
    J. Eric

    Excellent. I’m glad that Katz found a suitable home

    Collapse
  9. Avatar photo
    Paul B

    Now *this* is kind of nerdiness I'm looking for.

    Collapse
  10. Kelson924

    I’m sorry, but Dr Katz was not fired because of cancel culture, he was fired because he slept with a student, and then pressured the student to stay quiet, which is literally the one thing you can’t do with tenure. It’s page 1 subheading 1 of the tenure manual… we can’t fire you for any reason… except if you sleep with the students… so don’t sleep with the students. Yes they only found out about this because he ran his mouth about diversity stuff and yes that is totally protected by academic freedom. But academic freedom is not a shield against other bad behavior. You can’t say sure I robbed a bank but you only investigated me because I ran my mouth so you can’t prosecute me for my other crimes. We totally can. Mindless Knee jerk oppression of speech is bad. Mindlessly using academic freedom to covering for non academic bad behavior because the offender also has a big mouth is also… well mindless.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Chris K

      And just to chime in here - if Princeton were serious about going after conservatives and free speech types, you'd see them trying to make the lives of folks like Keith Whittington and Robert George a lot more miserable instead of funding initiatives like the James Madison Program and keep Sergiu Klainerman in his endowed chair (all of these who have been fighting the free speech fight for longer than Joshua-Come-Lately Katz).

      Katz played a Stupid Game and won a Stupid Prize. I also hope that he's a bit less coy in his new role as a pundit and policy wonk than he was about the faceless folks seeking to transform Princeon whom he declined to name.

      Collapse
    2. Avatar photo
      Paul B

      I have to respectfully disagree.
      Yes, sleeping with students is dumb and unprofessional. But (1) it wasn't illegal under the university's own rules at the time and (2) the university had already rendered punishment for that specific action (1 year's suspension).
      He did the crime and served the time according to rules that all parties knew when the crime occurred. We should certainly judge him on a moral level for his profound lapse in judgment. But that's a separate question from his whether he should have been administratively sanctioned at this point. American culture has long discouraged (or outright forbid) the weaponization of legal or administrative sanctions. For constitutional examples, look to the Double Jeapordy or Ex Post Facto Clauses. For legal examples, look to statutes of limitation for most non-violent crimes. Procedural finality is an important moral and cultural value in and of itself.

      Collapse
      1. Kelson924

        I take your point about double jeopardy and even more so about consistency. I am sure we can find, especially pre #metoo a history of people how also slept with students and the university laughed it off. That said 1)!his actions did violate university policy. https://www.dailyprincetonian.com/article/2021/02/alumni-allegations-princeton-joshua-katz
        2) the university only discovered after his suspension that he had coerced the student to stay quiet and that he lied to the investigators, 2 new offenses. Katz is trying to wrap himself in martyrdom for something he knew he could get in trouble for as evidenced by his coverup. In fact Katz was claiming martyrdom for the suspension alone which if I understand you correctly we both agree to be fair. There are indeed many martyrs in this area deserving of our protection, but Katz ain’t one of them.

        Collapse
      2. Alan

        Really? I feel like that is wishful thinking. We allow and accept the weponization of both administrative and legal sanctions all the time. I mean think about the war on drugs, and how that focused significantly on policing the poor (despite similar drug use in many cases to the rich), the sentencing disparities between crack and cocaine. The legal and administrative apparatus has almost always been used as a blunt tool to enact vengeance on people above and beyond what is done to your people

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          Paul B

          Good point. I only mean from a first principles standpoint. I could—and should—lob my complaints at everything you just mentioned.
          But that’s why I’m in a news site comment section and not lobbying my state government for sentencing reform!

          Collapse
      3. Avatar photo
        Pastorfbt

        What you said. Sounded like a desired result in search of a justification.

        Collapse
        1. Kelson924

          I don’t disagree with you that Princeton may not be being honest about their motives, but the bottom line is he got the punishment he knew could follow his crime. The reasons in Princeton investigators hearts aren’t relevant. He did the crime now he gets the time. I would also point out Katz’s motives aren’t pure here either. He is trying to weasel out of his consequences and has searched out academic freedom as his justification for his non academic related offense

          Collapse
          1. Avatar photo
            Dan

            Excuse me... Dr. Katz was very clear about what he did, and about what the consequences of his actions. He gave two answers, both of which can actually be true. And as for the consquences--it appears to me that he *has already suffered* the consequences. He lost tenure, was fired, was unemployed for a while, and now has to explain his past. Exactly when do the consequences end? Or, can he expect to be hounded by a Fury such as you for the rest of his professional/intellectual life, and have valid points and work undercut and cancelled because of what he did years and years ago?

            Tell me, anonymous Fury of the internet, are we no more than the sum of our actions? Shall Consequences, big or small, be suffered unending? Shall grace and mercy be reserved solely for those who do not sin? Or do we all deserve to have our own Furies (like you) hounding all of us no matter what we try and do to tell everyone else of our sins and that therefore we are not worthy of consideration or redemption, let alone being able to contribute to the public good?

            Collapse