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. V. Alan White's avatar

    I’m a lifelong APA member with APA emeritus status. I see many reasons for the online conference, and perhaps the…

  2. Colin Marshall's avatar

    Thanks for this, Matt – a good point. In scheduling the Pacific APA, Alex Sager and I did what I…

  3. Matt Lister's avatar

    “But, on the other hand, a virtual APA is in principle available to philosophers around the world” This is often…

  4. Kian Mintz-Woo's avatar

    Just a quick note to say that I thought these points were really well-taken. I registered for this year’s APA…

  5. LFC's avatar

    You’re right, that’s my mistake. Because the two incidents occurred a couple of months apart, I guess they often get…

  6. EAS's avatar

    This is incorrect. The incident involving Petrov occured on September 26, 1983. Petrov judged that the Oko early warning system’s…

  7. Gwen Bradford's avatar

In Memoriam: David C. Hoy (1944-2026)

Professor Hoy, who was emeritus at the University of California at Santa Cruz, was a leading expert on 20th-century Continental philosophy, including hermeneutics, critical theory, and post-structuralism. He started his career teaching at Princeton University in the 1970s. Comments are open for remembrances from those who knew Professor Hoy or for those who would like to comment on the significance of his work.

Philosopher Paul Roth at UCSC kindly shared this obituary, prepared in consultation with the family:

David Hoy, Distinguished Professor, Emeritus in the Department of Philosophy at UC-Santa Cruz passed away in Phoenix on January 13, 2026, after a long illness. He is survived by his wife and former colleague of over 55 years, Jocelyn Hoy and their daughter, Meredith Hoy.

Born in 1944 in Lockhaven, PA, David graduated from Yale in 1965. He continued on in graduate studies at Yale, receiving his PhD in Philosophy there in 1972. David began his academic career at Princeton prior to joining the UCSC Philosophy Department in 1981. Illness forced him into premature retirement in 2008.

David enjoyed a stellar academic career. He had a world-renowned reputation as a scholar in Continental philosophy and critical theory. The UCSC campus acknowledged his scholarly productivity and international stature by according him its highest scholarly rank—Distinguished Professor. David also was awarded a prestigious UC Presidential Chair (2000-2003). The description of the Presidential Chair states that they “are intended to encourage new or interdisciplinary program development or to enhance quality in existing academic programs of the University.” This nicely pinpoints who David was as a thinker and a person—someone who gave unstintingly of his time to bring a range of scholars together.

Apropos of that, certainly one of David’s most remarkable and enduring legacies consists in the nine NEH Summer Institutes that he directed or co-directed (often with the late Bert Dreyfus) between 1983 and 2002. While programs such as these have largely become relics of the past, they represented extraordinary opportunities for those fortunate enough to have been among the participants. That David gave of his time to organize and host what surely must be an NEH record number of these Institutes provides eloquent testimony to David’s commitment to the field both as an academic and an individual. From a scholarly standpoint, David was extra-ordinarily open and inquisitive. One of the memorable Summer Institutes that he and Dreyfus organized explored intersections in the thought of Heidegger and Davidson! Though more common now, it was then a major innovation to make a study of major philosophers from two profoundly different philosophical traditions. David helped pioneer efforts to bridge the imagined divide between Continental and Analytic philosophy. From a collegial perspective, his willingness to repeatedly invest the considerable time and energy demanded in order to orchestrate these gatherings was indicative of his love of the profession.

His prodigious publication output of books and articles notwithstanding, David somehow also found the wherewithal to serve for over nine years as Chair of the Philosophy Department. His contributions however to the campus community did not stop there. David also compiled an extraordinary record of service to UCSC above the departmental level, including serving as Associate Dean of the Humanities, Acting Dean of the Humanities, as well as an unbroken record of 20+ years of participation (many of them as chair) on numerous committees of the Academic Senate, including key committees such as Academic Personnel and Budget and Planning. Finally, beginning with the creation of the department’s PhD program in 2002, he advised a great majority of the graduate students for the first few years of that program. Indeed, David was the primary reason students came to the graduate program for the first several years of its existence. Along the way, he managed to garner as well an award for excellence in undergraduate teaching.

David was never “too busy” to help, regardless of whether the assistance was needed at the academic, institutional, collegial, or personal level. He personified a truly unique and rare generosity of spirit and intellectual openness. His many friends from around the US and across the world mourn his passing.

Leave a Reply to Dennis Arjo Cancel reply

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

10 responses to “In Memoriam: David C. Hoy (1944-2026)”

  1. david was department chair for my years at UC santa cruz from 1995 to 1998. later, in 2002, we organized a wonderful NEH institute together on consciousness and intentionality. he was mild-mannered and deferential in personal interactions, but he had a formidable philosophical mind and a strong pluralistic vision of philosophy. he and jocelyn were the glue that held our occasionally fractious small department together, and i’d always look forward to their warm gatherings. bert dreyfus and dick rorty were regular visitors at thanksgiving. by 2002 david was already affected by parkinsons and had deep brain stimulation which seemed to help a lot. one of the high points of the NEH institute was david’s neurosurgeon giving a visiting lecture accompanied by david’s phenomenological reflections. david was a terrific philosopher, an excellent mentor, a wonderful collaborator, and a fine friend.

  2. David was my first department chair, and very generously and shrewdly mentored me in the ways of the profession. I fondly remember his kindness, humility, and his understated, and often hilariously pointed, wit. His remarkable quiet courage in the face of terrible health challenges is an example for us all.

    Rest in peace, sir.

    1. Professor Andrew Norris

      I was fortunate enough to be David Hoy’s student in two lecture courses and one seminar at UCSC in the 1980’s. He was an excellent teacher. I was a handful at the best of times and an arrogant trial at the worst; he for his part was invariably well-informed, engaged, and utterly unflappable, always with his eye on what was best for the student(s). It only slowly dawned on me over the years how he had steadily set himself aside for me and my fellow students, and how much character that had shown. As a teacher I regularly think of him, invariably to my and my students’ benefit.

  3. David taught a grad seminar at Berkeley (one semester in the late 1980s) which picked up where Bert Dreyfus’s classes left off (after Foucault), in which (among other things) he introduced us to Derrida’s work on Heidegger (which I’ve enjoyed wrestling with ever since). I remember a great lunch year’s later with Bert, Taylor Carman, David, and Jocelyn; we had each other in stitches the whole time. He was a great guy, a kind teacher, and I’ll always remember him fondly.

  4. I met David in 1981 when I was a grad student at Princeton. Although no longer on the faculty he was still in town and I was somehow able to get course credit for meeting him at his house once a week or so to discuss Sartre. Among other things, I learned how not to take seriously the so-called divide between “Continental” and “analytic” philosophy. A tremendous presence here in the Bay Area and beyond, he will be mourned and missed.

  5. I don’t know a finer human being. It was a privilege to work with and learn from him, both personally and professionally.

  6. Jesse D Slavens

    Professor David Hoy guided me through my education at Santa Cruz from my very first quarter, where I took 20th-century French philosophy with him, to my master’s thesis, where he was my second reader. He was always brilliant, insightful, generous, and encouraging as a professor.

    Twenty-three years later, I still try to emulate his teaching style. Professor Hoy had the skill and patience for recognizing the strengths in a student’s inchoate question or point and drawing it out of the student until it was more fully formed. He always created an environment that encouraged students and gave them the confidence to develop their own thinking.

    Memory Eternal.

  7. I was in a class on Heidegger with David Hoy in the early 80s, and though I was thoroughly in over my head it was a critical class in convincing me my choice to major in philosophy was the right one. He was a great teacher and certainly gave lie to the idea that continental philosophy lacks rigor. I came out of that class with a decent grasp of Heidegger but more importantly a much better sense of what philosophy could be. I should also mention that I took a class with Jocelyn Hoy on Existentialism during my time at UCSC, which I also thoroughly enjoyed and remember still. My condolences to her.

  8. I took several undergraduate lectures and seminars with Professor Hoy at UCSC in ’07 and ’08, just before his retirement. He was well-regarded among the undergraduate and graduate cohorts as a top-shelf academic, and as importantly, a very kind man who always had time for his students.

    He also had some great stories about the Academy, particularly his experiences in Europe in the 60’s. At one undergraduate seminar on Foucault, Hegel, and Nietzsche, he told a story about a trip to Paris in ’67, where he had a formative experience studying Continental figures with French students and professors. So, he returned to France the next year expecting to resume his conversations about Heidegger and Merleau-Ponty. But when he did, Professor Hoy found that most of his friends had quit reading, started smoking pot, and only cared about the action in Paris ’68.

    Being UC Santa Cruz students, we found that anecdote charming and hilarious.

  9. Wynship W. Hillier, M.S.

    I first met Professor Hoy when I returned to UC Santa Cruz in Fall of ’92 to finish my undergraduate degree—started in ’86—after a two-year absence working and saving money. Prof. Noreña had suggested that I read Heidegger’s QCT prior to my return. I followed his advice and immediately contracted a bad case of the pathos of incomprehensibility. I made an attempt at Introduction to Metaphysics and visited Prof. Hoy to ask to take his Heidegger course that quarter. Other than these, my philosophical background consisted of a survey course on ethics and the nine weeks of Stevenson Core devoted to Plato, political philosophy, the Mills’ essay on feminism, Sartre’s Existentialism and Human Emotions, and Nietzsche’s Genealogy of Morals. Professor Hoy was moved by my enthusiasm and let me take the course.
    That same quarter, I read his The Critical Circle and asked him if he would serve on a committee for an individual major in philosophy of technology. While he was pleased that I had read his book, after reading my précis he declined to serve on the committee, stating that what I wanted to do wasn’t philosophy. I instead majored in computer and information sciences and did an honors thesis in science and technology studies.
    I continued to visit Professor Hoy. He kicked me out of his Hegel class because the number of students showing up exceeded the posted room capacity. I showed up at his HistCon seminar on Foucault once or twice. I continued to read Heidegger, and would show up at his office hours from time to time to ask whether two different works of Heidegger translated by two different translators were both translating the same German word as “lightening” and things of this sort. Professor Hoy was always willing to help, but I felt like I had to restrain myself because he was working too hard. He would never say “no” to anything for the reason that he was too busy.
    We used to dress the same, both strongly favoring coats with lapels and long-sleeved white oxfords with button-down collars, more than a little too formal and East Coast for hippy-dippy, “three sigmas left of center” Santa Cruz. When he said that he recommended that undergraduates not read Derrida, I made sure to finish Of Grammatology before graduation, having not read anything of the philosophical core literature beyond that mentioned above and The Gay Science. I had a bad case of engineering chauvinism and must have been insufferable. He would sometimes recommend books way beyond my capacity (such as Habermas’s Theory of Communicative Action) I thought just to take me down several notches, and I needed it.
    Although I studied economics-related interdisciplinary applied math in graduate school for an M.S. degree, I was happy to be able to source one of Foucault’s theses about politics to a novel by Blanchot, strongly emphasized in the secondary literature but without the Foucault connection, to professor Hoy in the early ‘00s. He never wrote back, but he seemed to appreciate the gesture, taking me out for coffee in ’03 after I returned to the west coast. He also had me over to his place and gave me a ride up to campus in his red convertible sportscar. I wondered whether he was trying to demonstrate that philosophers make a decent living and secretly probe me for interest in the new PhD. program there. I stumbled through our conversation, still having not read the core literature in philosophy, despite familiarizing myself rather too much with “postmodern” authors, and didn’t hear back from him again.
    When life-ruining, permanent disability struck me in mid-life, I let go of my technical interests and plunged into the core literature in philosophy finally, including Hegel. Then, I began to tackle the four very hard books he had suggested to me. I sent him a report of the first one, David Held’s Introduction to Critical Theory, in ’24 and set hard to work on getting up the background for Habermas. By now, I was beginning to suspect that his suggestions were far more prescient than I had originally thought. However, preparing for Habermas was a lot of work. A lawsuit intervened and gobbled up six months of my life as if it were so much shark bait. Alas, and rather later than I would have liked, I found that I had already inadvertently missed the penultimate deadline.

Designed with WordPress