Tuesday, April 12, 2005

Philosophical Blogging

Gillian Russell has posted an intriguing question: which great philosophers of the past had the blog-lust? Indeed it seems to me that she misses out on some obvious examples by forgetting that the public correspondances of the past were essentially blogs--so we've got to include Leibniz and Descartes and give them credit for getting non-philosophers--indeed non-philosopher royalty--to make appearances on their blogs. You don't see any European nobility contributing even to Weatherson!

But that reminds me of the question I addressed and never answered, i.e. the academic isolation of philosophy today. Before I suggested that it was perhaps just too hard--technical and specialized. Maybe so, but then lot's of other things are pretty hard--like Finnegan's Wake and Derrida--and that doesn't stop people from reading them. Since teenagers are interested in philosophy, it can't just be that people don't find philosophy interesting, like they might not find fluid mechanics very interesting. So that leaves two hypothesese: either what we do is boring or its wrong. But neither one of these is remotely plausible. Clearly I need to have my coffee.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home