Professor Parsonnet: Due to a conflict of interest, I have been asked to step in for Debra at this, mercifully, the last meeting of the Spring Quarter of the 49th Senate. At our meeting today we are first going to have a review of the Chair of the Faculty Senate, Debra Satz. This will be followed by a discussion on the status of squirrels on campus, a proposal for starting a new combined major in Computer Science and Mortuary Affairs, and plans by President Tessier-Lavigne to replace the Main Quad with an ice hockey rink, a Tim Horton’s and a poutin stand.
First though, we are approving the minutes of our meeting on January 26th, 1998, Senate Document Number 2,000,416. The minutes were sent to you by dogsled and Snapchat. Are there any amendments or corrections? Seriously, did any of you read the minutes this year? No? Ok, so I am going to approve them, without a vote, just as is my tradition when I am sitting in for Debra.
Because we have no voting items on the agenda today, we do not have to pretend to know Robert’s Rules of Order. I wish to remind you, though, that once more our meeting format is a bit different; presenters will give short presentations followed by substantial, and usually pointless, discussion. This is made possible by Senators having pretended to have read the material that we sent to them ahead of time. Today, to make sure that you have read the materials, we will have a brief quiz. Anyone who fails the quiz will be relegated to asking a question of the President or the Provost for the next 40 Senate sessions. Adrienne will be passing the quiz around shortly.
Moving on, Dean Saller will now present on “Debra Satz, the Chair of the Faculty Senate;” he will have 3.141519 minutes followed by 2.71828 minutes for discussion.
Dean Richard Saller: Thank you Julie, and good afternoon. I have a short slide presentation to make as we review the Chair of the Faculty Senate, Debra Satz. [slides omitted] As many of you know, Debra has worked at my side for the past seven years as Senior Associate Dean for the Humanities and Arts, and she is also the Martha Sutton Weeks Professor of Ethics and Society in the Department of Philosophy.
When I think about what Debra has done this past year as Chair of the Faculty Senate, I connect all of those things to her background as a philosopher. Philosophers believe in giving reasons for things, and in dialogue, debate, and discussion. You know what I am talking about here: reading in advance, short presentations, more questions from the floor.
This won’t surprise many of you, but what might surprise you is what Debra is proposing for next year’s Faculty Senate. She shared with me a draft of her proposal, which I have the privilege of sharing with you today. The idea is drawn from her award-winning book of 2011, Why Some Things Should Not Be For Sale: The Moral Limit of Markets. After deep philosophical reflection, Debra has concluded that the seats on the Faculty Senate are exactly the sort of thing that should be for sale.
So beginning this summer, seats on the Faculty Senate will be auctioned off to interested faculty. She believes that this will improve efficiency and boost attendance at Senate meetings; moreover, all proceeds will go to support better drinks and snacks at Senate meetings.
Side note: We have an inside prediction game on what bid will be needed by faculty to purchase a Senate seat. Members of the 49th Faculty Senate, please prepare to open your wallets if you wish to remain in your seats. How much do you think will be necessary? Last time I checked eBay, the bids exceeded $8.
Debra has worked tirelessly to improve the university – from her efforts in the Philosophy Department, in the Center for Ethics in Society, in the Dean’s Office – and now in the Faculty Senate. These efforts have been appreciated and recognized by many of us. But not by everyone, and evidently not by her lovely son, Isaac, because Isaac has chosen to decline Stanford’s offer of admission in order to go to Swarthmore next year. Evidently, reason-giving and deliberation has its limits in the Satz household!
Parsonnet: Thank you very much, Dean Saller, for that very erudite presentation, but it was way too much talking. We are now open for discussion. For efficiency, I am going to bundle questions together. If you want to ask a question in a new domain, please raise one finger; if you want to follow up on a previous point, raise two fingers; if you want to order pizza, please raise three fingers; and if you simply want to leave, wave both hands in the air while singing the last verse of Hail Stanford Hail!
Professor Hank Greely: Thank you – but first I do have to congratulate Dean Saller – Sailor? – Sallert? – Salieri? — whatever, for that really incisively turgid presentation. You know, I don ’t care who hears me say this, but I think you have been the greatest H&S dean this decade! But to paraphrase Habermas: What I really want to obliviate about is this book, by this philosophist, or philologer, or whatever, this Some Things Should Not Be For Sale, which I think has immediate, pressing implications for the Stanford Faculty Senate, and indeed for the future of all sentient, or possibly sentient, life in the observable universe, which does make it kind of surprising that it is currently ranked number 369,252 on Amazon, but of course that’s the paperback edition. Which seems kind of an immoral waste of trees, frankly, so maybe that is something that shouldn’t be for sale, except as an e-book, but that was this morning, so it’s probably gone up a little, or not, but anyway, my point is — and I do want to stress that this is not a planted question, and in fact may not be a question at all: Would it be wrong for me to sell the remainder of my 2.71828 minutes of speaking time, if I could get a really good price?
Professor Ross Shachter: As the Senior Senator from Management Science, I commend Dean Saller on his remarks and Professor Greely on his remarks, and what the heck, me on mine! Because I think this is a most important question, and while everything that could be said about it has already been said, everybody has not yet had a chance to say it. Therefore, this would be a most opportune moment for us to break into our Senate Discussion Groups.
Professor Judith Goldstein: Thank you. Thank you, Dean Saller, as ever for your, as ever, insightful remarks, and they were so good. And thank you, Hank Greely, for your gracious comments on Debra’s book, they were so good. And Ross (Shachter), what was that question?
I think we need to pause and ask ourselves a fundamental question, since we are here, thinking about Debra, and that question is so fundamental: If we are going to think about creating a market, we need to ask ourselves what the correct price is for a Humanities program? Or for Humanities at all? Or for a Humanities instructor, or maybe even for a department? And do we really need those people? And by the way, what is going on in those offices? Aren’t they the bad people, is that the deep state? I guess we really need to ask ourselves about purpose – unnecessary – bad, just so bad.
Parsonnet: That is a very interesting question, but I am sorry we ran out of time, and we will need to table it until our next opening in the Faculty Senate agenda, which I think is in 2104.
Next on today’s agenda, I want to thank Debra Satz, on behalf of the Senate, for her leadership as Chair over the last year. She was, as you all know, a really brilliant leader of this body, creating a comprehensive and wonderful agenda, always intent on getting us to participate and to form consensus, while leading us efficiently, and with a great sense of humor. It has been a productive and engaging year. For those of you who don’t know, being Chair of the Senate and the Steering Committee is a lot of work, and Debra, of course with Hans and Adrienne at her side, seemed to make it effortless. Thank you so much, Debra, and I would like to present you with a certificate and a gift of a gavel that you can use to whip your dog and kids into shape.