I've been alerted to an extraordinarily abusive review, of Ted Honderich's recent edited collection of papers on philosophy of mind (Ted Honderich, On Consciousness. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2004), by Colin McGinn (Philosophical Review, Vol. 116, No. 3, 2007), which has led to a lengthy correspondence (but as far as I can see one entirely about good and bad manners in reviewers, and the troubled history of the UCL department, not about the substance of McGinn's criticisms nor any response by Honderich) on Leiter's Blog:
http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2007/10/colin-mcginn-di.html. <
http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2007/10/colin-mcginn-di.html.>
The review in question, and Honderich's substantive response, can be found at
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~uctytho/McGinnReview.htmland
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~uctytho/HonderichOnMcGinnOnHonderich.html <
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~uctytho/HonderichOnMcGinnOnHonderich.html> .
I should perhaps add that I have no axe to grind here: I myself hold - tentatively - to a philosophy of mind even less popular and maybe even more peculiar (Plotinian) than either McGinn's ('mysterian') or Honderich's ('radical externalist')!
DIscussion of these matters should be offlist or on chora: issues of philosophical substance rather than style or departmental history would be the more welcome!
Stephen
Messages to the list are archived at http://listserv.liv.ac.uk/archives/philos-l.html.
Prolonged discussions should be moved to chora: enrol via
http://listserv.liv.ac.uk/archives/chora.html.
Other philosophical resources on the Web can be found at http://www.liv.ac.uk/pal.