Talk:Keith Frankish

Frankish's take on other philosopher's responses
I have restored KF's take on other philosopher's reaction to his work. I understand why that might seem biased at first blush. Or how it might seem like we are letting the patient diagnose themselves. However, this was KF's published summary of published articles submitted in response to his first target article all in the same issue of an academic journal dedicated to this particular topic. These are not blog posts, tweets, distracks, or youtube rants. These are comments in an academic journal to which all of the mentioned thinkers themselves contributed. In philosophy this is about as legit as it gets. This is a specialized field. The alternative would be for us wikipedia editors to read and interpret each of the named philosopher's response. Which you are welcome to do if you like. However, the odds we get that more correct than Frankish are small. And even if Frankish were wrong, presenting his take in his voice is, in fact, the proper "neutral point of view" WP:NPOV. For an example of how this is allowed, check out Hard problem of consciousness to see how much Chalmers gets to be a voice in the debate of his own idea. You are free to add further comments or responses from the listed and other experts (with proper reference), but simply deleting the paragraph (and the sources!) is to impoverish the article for no good reason. DolyaIskrina (talk) 21:21, 26 March 2021 (UTC)