tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post7471802778979611173..comments2023-10-29T10:32:36.914-04:00Comments on Philosophy, et cetera: The Medium of PhilosophyRichard Y Chappellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16725218276285291235noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-34038121273783969372009-03-21T20:32:00.000-04:002009-03-21T20:32:00.000-04:00More controversially: I'm inclined to think that e...<I> More controversially: I'm inclined to think that even "high-level" philosophy, i.e. journal articles, would often be better in (something like) blog format. Granted, some papers really do need all those ten thousand words to make their point. But most often, I think the core insight could be easily captured in an 800 word blog post, and the rest is just tying up loose ends, or repetitive exposition for struggling readers -- stuff that could easily be delegated to separate - hyperlinked - pages, rather than bloating the main work.</I><BR/><BR/>I am <I>very</I> much with you on this point; I cannot count the number of articles I've had to read whose basic point could have been put in a few hundred words, with perhaps an excursus or appendix or two or three for particular secondary questions of note.<BR/><BR/>One of the things I like about blogging is that I think it is a medium whose expression of intellectual results fits more closely to real intellectual progress. Real intellectual progress is very piecemeal and meandering. As I'm doing something completely different, I may come up with a very promising idea that moves the discussion forward -- but promising as it may be, it may still be a long way from being developed into even an informal seminar paper. But if I put the idea out there, then I have the clarification that comes with actually setting it down in words, and if it strikes anyone as interesting, they can take it up and use it or object to it or what have you -- progress doesn't have to sit idle waiting for the ideas to be polished up enough that, as you say, the loose ends are all tied up and the likely questions are all answered. It can be done on the fly, and to some extent we see it done on the fly, and thus the actual inquiry is less hidden. This can and sometimes does lead to confusion and misunderstanding, but of course confusion and misunderstanding are not unique to the medium of blogging. And the nice thing about blogging is that there's more room to find a way of doing it that makes you comfortable; I think a lot of good ideas are found in bad papers, and the bad papers are bad papers because people start worrying less about the ideas and more about making the paper what we expect (or think other people expect) a paper to be.<BR/><BR/>I agree that it's not quite as good as real, in the person philosophical dialectic -- serious discussion in person between people who have a decent grasp of the topic and are really interested in discovering the truth of the matter -- but it may well be getting as close as you can get to that in written form.Brandonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06698839146562734910noreply@blogger.com