Has anyone read Julia Annas?

[Onasander]

Ive seen some of her smaller tracts on sale in stores before, but didnt buy them,give my preference for primary sources first.

 

Im reading 'Emotions and Choice From Boethius to Descartes', and she gets a few pages devoted to her. I have no inherent reason to scoff or reach out, seems competent... may buy this book in fact, but when I googled her, I discovered she was a professor from Harvard's Philosophy department.

 

This is a very big problem, given Rawls came from it, and hugely discredit Harvard by his infantile, idiot theories, especially his unusable Veil of Ignorance. Anyone seeing Dr. Who's 50th Anniversary special would recognize it, from the scene where everyone was given amnesia to better negotiate.....

 

Basically, short of wacking everyone upside the head with a hammer in the UN, the 'theory' has zero applicability. I baby holding a diaper full of poo in a negotiation standoff has a higher chance for success than someone applying Rawls.

 

Ive seen Rawls debated to death, and he always get laughed at and shot down. He dominated Harvard for a very long time..... so I have as a result a very, very low opinion of Harvard Philosophy.

 

She focuses on Ancient Philosophy of the western world.

 

Im guessing a few here have read something by her. Is she another joke, or does she actually show evidence of knowing something? Is she more a historian of philosophy, or a philosopher first? Does she do legitimate work, or is she just Tenure Farming books out, and going to silly little conferences with other academics to eat huge salads in distant hotel lobbies, giving speaches on phrases and other minutia from texts no one cares about?

 

It seems most books are written by this latter type of misfit. Im tiring of wasting money on the worthless works of Tenure Farmers, they take everything from a work except its vibrancy and life under consideration. They dont seek a intimate, working knowledge or experience, but a act of crude vivissectioovivissectionof a corpse soon to be tossed aside from concerns. Even this, however, is preferable to the extreme stupidity of Rawls.

 

Hence my concerns. Where does she sit on this spectrum? Is she one of Rawls stooges, or a disinterested Tenure Farmer, or does she strike at the crux of the matters before her, illuminating their vibrancy, seeking their limits and contradictions, and showing a metric to what lies beyond?

 

Given Harvard's reputation, I think stooge. However, I might be wrong. Just dont want to blow money on her works just to discover my instinct was indeed right tobegin with.

 

If you read her works, where do you think she sits?

[Metella]

I love your take on this ....   while I can't add anything to the subject you are trying to learn about - I would like to add about the tangent ....

 

I knew a chick that went to Harvard - she was dumb as brick - but was in there because her dad went and he had a ton of money.  She snorted coke and would be happy sitting all day staring out the window.  She was a lovey thing.  She graduated with a degree from Harvard and that wrangled her a rich husband .... end of her life -story.     I have no respect for the name of Harvard ... if anyone throws that around, they have an even bigger hurtle to overcome to gain my respect.

 

Shame what humans do for greed and money - on both sides of this sad story of a waste of a pretty human form.