Article About Clarity

  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Philosophy 101
  3. » Article About Clarity

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

Reply Fri 13 Nov, 2009 02:57 am
I stumbled across a page concerning clarity in general in the field of philosophy. Nigel Warburton (author of Thinking from A to Z) answers 5 excellent questions about clarity posed by Stephen Law:

Butterflies and Wheels Article

I think he gives some great advice on writing in philosophy--it's something worth looking through.
 
Emil
 
Reply Fri 13 Nov, 2009 06:10 am
@loudthoughts,
Thanks! Very good article.
 
kennethamy
 
Reply Fri 13 Nov, 2009 07:16 am
@loudthoughts,
loudthoughts;103254 wrote:
I stumbled across a page concerning clarity in general in the field of philosophy. Nigel Warburton (author of Thinking from A to Z) answers 5 excellent questions about clarity posed by Stephen Law:

Butterflies and Wheels Article

I think he gives some great advice on writing in philosophy--it's something worth looking through.


He does give excellent advice, Now, if people will only take it to heart.
 
jgweed
 
Reply Fri 13 Nov, 2009 07:39 am
@loudthoughts,
"If I find something is said very unclearly, can I really be confident the author doesn't understand it him or herself?"

Only if you are confident that you know what clarity is, and that the lack of understanding is not your own fault.

While I certainly agree that philosophical positions should be written with as much clarity and precision as the subject allows, at the same time there are many subjects not always best expressed or understood by the use of "simple" clarity that makes a point obvious at first reading, or that eliminates the need for careful and thoughtful re-reading.
 
kennethamy
 
Reply Fri 13 Nov, 2009 07:48 am
@jgweed,
jgweed;103274 wrote:
"If I find something is said very unclearly, can I really be confident the author doesn't understand it him or herself?"

Only if you are confident that you know what clarity is, and that the lack of understanding is not your own fault.

While I certainly agree that philosophical positions should be written with as much clarity and precision as the subject allows, at the same time there are many subjects not always best expressed or understood by the use of "simple" clarity that makes a point obvious at first reading, or that eliminates the need for careful and thoughtful re-reading.


A test is whether what is said can be translated into plain English. The plain English can be complicated, but not, itself, obscure.
 
Michel
 
Reply Fri 13 Nov, 2009 01:06 pm
@loudthoughts,
I'm sympathetic to the author's viewpoint given that I had to struggle through Heidegger. I literally hate reading much of the work stemming from his line of thought, phenomenology, post-structuralism, etc. Just for shits and giggles, I encourage everyone to read a chapter from Heidegger, Hegel or Martin Buber and compare it to the work of, say, Betrand Russell, Quine, or my personal favorite Simone Weil. If you're anything like me, you'll find the latter authors to be a pleasure to read while the former authors require a handful of Advil tablets and a mouth guard so you don't grind away your teeth.
 
TalkingBook
 
Reply Fri 13 Nov, 2009 03:32 pm
@loudthoughts,
Thanks, an interesting article with some sound advice.

Nigel Warburton also produces a podcast called Philosophy Bites, which features "top philosophers interviewed on bite-sized topics..." I've only listened to a handful so far, but as of yet my only complaint is that they are too short (ca. 15 minutes each). Worth a listen in my opinion. The podcast can be downloaded either from iTunes or through Juice.

Here's their site: philosophy bites
 
Emil
 
Reply Fri 13 Nov, 2009 04:21 pm
@Michel,
Michel;103345 wrote:
I'm sympathetic to the author's viewpoint given that I had to struggle through Heidegger. I literally hate reading much of the work stemming from his line of thought, phenomenology, post-structuralism, etc. Just for shits and giggles, I encourage everyone to read a chapter from Heidegger, Hegel or Martin and compare it to the work of, say, Betrand Russell, Quine, or my personal favorite Simone Weil. If you're anything like me, you'll find the latter authors to be a pleasure to read while the former authors require a handful of Advil tablets and a mouth guard so you don't grind away your teeth.


You may like this. It will generate a nonsense essay for you. A new one every time.
 
Pyrrho
 
Reply Mon 28 Dec, 2009 05:39 pm
@Michel,
Michel;103345 wrote:
I'm sympathetic to the author's viewpoint given that I had to struggle through Heidegger. I literally hate reading much of the work stemming from his line of thought, phenomenology, post-structuralism, etc. Just for shits and giggles, I encourage everyone to read a chapter from Heidegger, Hegel or Martin Buber and compare it to the work of, say, Betrand Russell, Quine, or my personal favorite Simone Weil. If you're anything like me, you'll find the latter authors to be a pleasure to read while the former authors require a handful of Advil tablets and a mouth guard so you don't grind away your teeth.


I prefer massive quantities of alcohol when presented with something from Heidegger. I would now present what a philosophy professor once told me about German philosophers whose names begin with the letter "h", and expand the idea, but I suspect that it would violate forum rules to do so. Suffice it to say, some famous people have said a good deal of nonsense.
 
Reconstructo
 
Reply Mon 28 Dec, 2009 05:47 pm
@loudthoughts,
Clarity is great. Some thought are just difficult, though. And sometimes difficult thoughts are expressed in a unnecessarily difficult style. Even in this case it's sometimes worth it.

Also, difficulty is relative. Sometimes we just "click" with a thinker. Is Richard Rorty difficult? To me he's clear. To others, whose temperaments are opposite, he's not so clear.

I stayed away from Hegel and Heidegger for a long time, because of their reputations. They came up to often in the works of other philosophers for me to continue to ignore them. It sucks to not know what is being talked about. No pain, no gain. It's always tempting to write off what we have not yet tackled. It flatters us.
 
joel phil
 
Reply Thu 18 Feb, 2010 05:01 am
@loudthoughts,
Smile thanks it was a useful first article for me to read, and i feel on track with my past writing from humanities courses, long ago now.
 
kennethamy
 
Reply Thu 18 Feb, 2010 06:48 am
@joel phil,
joel;129620 wrote:
Smile thanks it was a useful first article for me to read, and i feel on track with my past writing from humanities courses, long ago now.


I think that everyone who registers for this site should be given a quiz on the article to make sure he read it and understood it before he is allowed to register. The passing grade should be 100%. And it would not hurt for all members to be tested that way. Like another driving test.
 
 

 
  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Philosophy 101
  3. » Article About Clarity
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/26/2024 at 12:58:52