Western philosophy departments must open their minds

There are interesting diverse systems of thought worth including in philosophy education, but I doubt Western lecturers are going to be goaded into deep reading of multiple translations of obscure texts from unfamiliar cultural contexts to tease out the nuanced points of view required to legitimately take non-Western ideas "as seriously as any other". I think the author's time would have be better spent spreading ideas on how to include specialists with diverse view points and academics from other cultures. Or better yet, publishing material engaged with their work, rather than accusing his colleagues of xenophobia – this is almost a replica of the linked NYT article. It's hard to read these articles without seeing the "white saviour" trope playing out. How many departments in the non-Western world have courses dedicated to thinkers and ideas from other non-Western countries? How many non-Western researchers have cared enough to gather this information and be dismayed by it? Perhaps nothing is more Western than asserting sole responsibility for the flourishing of other cultures, and as a non-Westerner, I find it quite patronising and colonial – albeit in a trendy post-post-colonial way. These accusations of neglectfulness unkindly disregard the practical and cognitive difficulties in faithfully bridging diverse reference points (especially if the named luminous theologians are meant to be representative – especially if one lacks the ideological zeal) and infantalises the cultures apparently suffering this neglect. Intellectual trade, not aid! If there are no specialists available, I'd rather spend a semester with a moderately well-versed one-track mind than the disinterested dilettante's musings on Ethiopian apologetics, however ennobling the later situation might make us both feel. Additionally, it's blatantly false to suggest that, "If a geography, history or politics department were to offer a similarly narrow syllabus, we would probably think that it was not fit for purpose." A glance at the names in a textbook from any subject also refutes this – or better yet, publication and citation stats on this website. The cited SMF report quoting “lack of cultural connection to the curriculum” as a key reason for minorities dropping out of other subjects also suggests otherwise. The fields mentioned in the article are diverse in content but not viewpoint; in Geography (literally the study of the world) all the standard projections place its Western creators on the psychologically significant top of the globe, we're often taught only Western names for various features, populations are analysed with Western assumptions, etc. History is the worst possible example, as it's the main academic scapegoat for anti-Eurocentrism and anti-patriarchism. Pretty much any language-based cultural artefacts consumed in any "lingosphere" will tend to be produced by the lingosphere – provided it has the productivity to satisfy demand. The best way to demonstrate the richness of the work of other groups is by engaging with them deeply and critically like you would any other work, thereby exposing them to other professionals. Put your money where your mouth is instead of merely name-dropping random theologians in polemical articles. Who will join me now in protest of the underrepresentation of the longstanding and esteemed musical traditions of Native American, Eastern European and Pacific Islander peoples in drive-time radio?