Leiter Reports: A Philosophy Blog

News and views about philosophy, the academic profession, academic freedom, intellectual culture, and other topics. The world’s most popular philosophy blog, since 2003.

  1. Fool's avatar
  2. Santa Monica's avatar
  3. Charles Bakker's avatar
  4. Matty Silverstein's avatar
  5. Jason's avatar
  6. Nathan Meyvis's avatar
  7. Stefan Sciaraffa's avatar

    The McMaster Department of Philosophy has now put together the following notice commemorating Barry: Barry Allen: A Philosophical Life Barry…

A.P. Bio, a new (apparently awful) show involving a former philosophy professor

Brian Leiter

Philosopher James Klagge (Virginia Tech) writes:

You probably didn't see this TV show:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A.P._Bio

But it is a ghastly send up of philosophers.  The background is that the main character fails to get tenure at Harvard, and is beat out for his dream job at Stanford by someone else.  The premiss of the show so far is him trying to get back at the guy that got the job at Stanford (who then gets a MacArthur award), and using his students to help him.  He has no interest or ability in AP Bio, and manipulates his principal to keep from being held accountable for anything he does.

I was appalled.

Indeed, I had not even heard of it (I never watch T.V., except occasionally in a hotel while travelling).  Thoughts from other readers who have seen it?

Leave a Reply to Richard Baron Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

14 responses to “A.P. Bio, a new (apparently awful) show involving a former philosophy professor”

  1. Josh

    I saw the first episode. I thought it was kind of funny.

    Reply
  2. Phillip Deen

    This show is a dark comedy, which Professor Klagge does not acknowledge. As such, there are already serious problems with (a) criticizing it for being morally dark since that is essential to the style of humor and (b) evaluating a comedy for its supposed moral content since it is not clear at all that humor even makes assertions or that these assertions should be judged morally instead of aesthetically. So, even if it did portray philosophers as immoral, it is not clear how this would provide a legitimate basis for criticizing it.

    However, it does not do that. It is not intended to be, nor is it, a send up of philosophers. The fact that that terrible protagonist is a philosopher is irrelevant to the show, other than the fact that he is a failed and petty academic. He could be a botanist and it would make no difference. Contrast this with The Good Place, in which the fact that a character is an ethics professor is central to the entire show.

    That said, it is not a great show. Though it has a few very funny jokes, it is not quite together. It is generally a good idea to refrain from judging comedies until after half a season and the writers have figured out the characters and what stories work. Recall the slow starts for The Office and Parks & Recreation, two other NBC sitcoms. The show's creator is Mike O'Brien, who wrote for Saturday Night Live and has created some very funny short films. It would be better to wait and to be charitable in our interpretation of his work.

    Reply
  3. Richard Baron

    I watched a few minutes of the episode on Youtube then gave up, unimpressed. But perhaps Phillip Deen is right that one should not pass judgement too soon.

    One dark-comedy point of comparison is Woody Allen's film Irrational Man. That film was alright, and it had a nice philosophical twist involving a torch, but it was nothing special.

    If you want a really good send-up of academia, I recommend David Lodge's novel Small World (and the other two in the trilogy, Changing Places and Nice Work). or in a different but equally funny vein, Malcolm Bradbury's My Strange Quest for Mensonge.

    Reply
  4. Tom Hurka

    Or Malcolm Bradbury's The History Man, which we can enjoy because the asshole academic is a sociologist.

    Reply
  5. Grad student

    Network shows like big bang theory are keen on getting the physics right and hire actual physicists to advise them. Why doesn't AP bio care about getting the philosophy right? I half-watched the first episode and the references were terrible. Any upper-div undergrad could've given them better ideas. Here's one instance: student's last name was X, the bio teacher says "X? that's the last name of one of my favorite philosophers…he believed that the entire universe was a single cosmic thought in mind." I'm paraphrasing but not far off. Painful.

    Reply
  6. Jack

    The show is funny. Glad it is on the air. The main actor is a brilliant comedian, who has been on the hilarious show "It's always Sunny in Philadelphia."

    It's supposed to be a satire…which I hope philosophers will understand and quit being literalists.

    Reply
  7. Adam

    Professor Klagge doesn't argue like this: there is a morally bankrupt philosopher in the show. So, the show is bad. Rather, the argument is this: there is a morally bankrupt philosopher in the show. So, philosophers/philosophy looks bad.

    And philosophers do not look bad just because of the lead. For example, there's a scene where the lead calls his "nemesis" who just got a philosophy job at Stanford. When the nemesis answers the phone, we see him: he is smug, finely dressed, lounging–feet stretched–on a couch in a large, luxuriant home without a care in the world while taking the call. As if that is the life of an academic philosopher.

    Reply
  8. Anon grad

    Let us suppose, for the sake of argument, someone watches the show and is left with the impression "huh, guess academic philosophers are horrible people". Do we really care to correct an individual that draws that conclusion from a comedy tv show? Is the majority of the audience going to be so naive and uncritical about the portrayal of the characters? Did shows like Grey's Anatomy convinced all of us that medical doctors are all about romancing each other up in the most dramatic ways while lives are at stake? Did bar owners across the US rose up in arms when a group of morally abhorrent bar owners engage in sociopathic shenanigans (It's always sunny…)? Did they ought to?

    I think Professor Klagge gives too little credit to an average viewer for this to now be an "issue".

    Reply
  9. Murthwaite

    I briefly watched a bit of the first episode. As a Canadian I have a bit of an outsiders perspective, and my all too brief impression of it is that the show appears to be less of a satire of academic life or philosophy than yet another version of a familiar American theme: Rebellious bratty American anti-hero bests snooty upper-class British or European villain (Bart and Sideshow Bob come to mind). Maybe there will be more to it, but to me it looks to be yet another recycling of this than anything else-somehow I doubt the show's creators know much about academic life or even teaching high school then other than clichés.

    Reply
  10. grad student

    That reference was to the actual philosopher Prabhat Sarkar.

    The show is funny. The Good Place is smart funny, and AP Bio is dumb-funny. But not everything needs to be smart.

    I'm vaguely amused by the recurring gag that whenever the (deplorable) main character does something unethical, he refers to a branch of ethics that would permit his action ("consequences are the same either way, it's called holistic consequentialism"). His argument is never sound, but it's funny nonetheless.

    Reply
  11. jack

    The show is supposed to be absurd.

    Please, fellow philosophers, don't let others know you have no sense of humor.

    Reply
  12. Ted Talbot

    Quite funny, actually, even if it doesn't accurately reflect contemporary British analytic philosophy or whatever. Thanks for the tip!

    Reply
  13. James Mahon

    The real problem with this show is not that it sends up philosophers. The real problem is that it has a male teacher, Jack Griffin, asking female high school students to write sexually suggestive or even sexually explicit messages to send to his rival, hitting a female high school student in the midriff because he believes she is hiding a textbook under her top, telling everyone that he wants to “bang” his former high school sweetheart, and so forth (the first three episodes). It is produced by, among others, Seth Meyers, but seems much more like something that would be produced by Seth MacFarlane.

    As far as sending up philosophers goes, my complaint is that this philosopher describes himself as a “philosophy scholar”. I don’t know anyone who is a philosopher who says, “I am a philosophy scholar.” I do not have a complaint about making the main character out to be an egomaniacal jerk who flies into rages of jealousy. Nor do I have a problem with the philosophy he talks about with his students. It is not more egregious than any other TV show in this regard.

    If this show could stop being so sexist, so misogynist, so dismissive of problems faced by high schoolers, etc., then it *might* actually be a good thing that two current TV shows feature philosophers and philosophy (“The Good Place” and “A. P. Bio”). But this show, it seems, has little actual interest in philosophy, unlike “The Good Place.”

    Reply
  14. not an academic

    What's reflects more poorly on philosophers/philosophy is fretting about how they how their profession looks by association of a character on a NBC show. Perhaps the character of the show should be more insecure and hyperdefensive for accuracy to the subject matter.

    —–
    KEYWORDS:
    Primary Blog

    Reply

Designed with WordPress