Opinion | Kwame Anthony Appiah Hasn’t Done the Reading Highlight

That said, clarity is not synonymous with accuracy. John K. Wilson notes the lack of direct evidence warranting the field-based scrutiny recommended in the report. Agustín Fuentes argues that the report’s depiction of his field, anthropology, is misleading. Nicholas Dirks and Brian Leiter separately note the report’s imprecise definition of “relativism,” despite their sympathies with its conclusions, while both Leiter and Richard Moran critique the irregularities in the constitution of its committee. Jason Stanley questions the committee’s breadth of understanding in analytic philosophy, the tiny sliver of the humanities that is the home discipline of nearly half of the committee. To their credit, the writers of the report have responded to these and other charges with surprising candor.