>>11024131>philosophy professors are liberalNah man, this is a very naive statement. Most philosophers are centrists or classical liberal types. This goes wayyyyy back before the current iteration of the culture war to the early analytic philosophers like Russell and Moore who denounced the relativism and scientific scepticism of the early continental philosophers, most notably the adherents of German Idealism on the one hand, and early nihilists/existentialists on the other. This disparity was only magnified by the positivist epistemology and social philosophy, which basically provided the foundation for the development of contemporary economic theory in the works of Hayek on macroeconomics, and even more importantly, the decision theory and game theory of von Neuman, Oskar Morgenstern, Syndney Morgenbesser, Kenneth Arrow, and Amartya Sen.
This takes us to about mid century. At this point, philosophy departments in the anglo-american world are thoroughly centrist/liberal, and this tendency will only continue to grow in response to the emergence of contemporary thinking on political liberalism and ethics by philosophers like Rawls, Parfitt, and Nozick on the one hand, and the emergence of cognitivism in linguistics and philosophy of mind on the other. I won't say too much about the former trend, but regarding the latter, it can be roughly said to originate in the formal work of Alan Turing, Noam Chomsky, and to a lesser extent, the ecological psychologists and phenomenologists like Gibson and Maurice Merleau-Ponty. By about the 60s, several results and finding in (proto)cognitive science came down conclusively againt the tabula-rasa crowd. This of course cause an immediate wave of nativist speculation in cognitive science and philosophy regarding the origins and flexibility of human cognition, and obviously spawned a lot of criticism of cultural relativism.
Moving in the 21st century, the story gets even more complex, but the same essential trend continues.
