On Normal Philosophy

I'm posting part of my response to commentators from the Author Meets Critics panel on my book at Congress 2017.

I'm not posting details of the commentators' comments or my reactions; my thoughts on all that great stuff are making their way into my ongoing work, and I'm immensely grateful to my commentators for their insights and for moving my thinking along. Here, I'm just posting my introduction and conclusion: the frame of my response.

In this frame, I explain why I won't be providing a "defence" of What Love Is And What It Could Be (tl;dr -- I wasn't feeling defensive and the book is indefensible), and I say a bit about how it feels to come to a business-as-usual philosophy event, when one's business is very much not as usual.