Returning to the Age of Blogging

I have decided to finally resume blogging. This time, however, I plan to focus on various threads—some still loose and some already converged—of my philosophical research. I believe that ideas should be handled impersonally particularly in science and philosophy. For this reason, I am not convinced about keeping the components of an ongoing research secret. If people can build on your ideas even when your ideas are still in their larval stage, then it does not matter whether they reference you or not. As long as ideas and concepts can be enhanced, refined and propagated, plagiarism is a virtue rather than a vice. The task of a philosopher is to highlight the hard fact that the concept is that over which no single human has a final grip. Therefore, the whole obsession with working in secret, keeping things in the closet until the book is published is absurd. To take the concept of open-source seriously, one must first take the idea of an open-source self seriously. In this sense, we are far from the Wulfian ideal of a global collabratory even though the internet has effectively knocked down some of the walls. So to this end, the blogging medium gives me the right amount of control in conducting my research and openning it to people who pick up ideas as tools so as to make better tools that can be put in the service of thinking in general.

So what will be the future posts on this blog? Currently, I am planning to allocate a major part of it to the systematic philosophy of mind, that is, a family of fundamental correlations: intelligence and the intelligable, structure and being, theory and object, language and the world. In this sense, what I mean by the systematic philosophy of mind is in truth systematic philosophy (the organon of theory) itself, formulated in different forms from Plato and Confucius to Descartes, Hume, Kant and Hegel, and more recently Lorenz Puntel and Uwe Peterson. Within this framework, I would like to also write about philosophy of science (particularly my heros Wolfgang Stegmüller and Adolf Grünbaum), logic and computation, and Euclid’s Elements. The latter is more a personal interest of mine than a topic explicitly fitting the aforementioned framework. However, I believe Elements is the first work that attempts to integrate formal thinking and systematic thinking and in doing so, openning new pathways to the questions of structure and theory. Having taught Elements in a number of courses, I always tell my students that they should engage with Elements not only as a mathematical treatise but also as a philosophical thriller, an exercise in making worlds and concepts using a handful of naive intuitive axioms or data. In this respect, the plan is to build on some of the best commentaries on Elements as a kind of toy philosophy universe (much on this topic in the next post). My immediate references are Proclus’s commentary as well as the seminal essays by Kenneth Manders and Danielle Macbeth.

In addition, there will be some posts on the ascesis of autodidacticism particularly for those who are bent to become philosophers and survive in a paraacademic world where the finances are always close to zero, standards are clouded by hatred of academia and rigor is still a taboo word yet nevertheless ideas do not reek of the stale dungeons of academia. As for the form and the style, well, the posts will oscillate between formal and informal, essay-form and rambling, preaching and scolding: In short, this blog’s mission is the comprehensive corruption of the youth.

10 thoughts on “Returning to the Age of Blogging

  1. Pingback: Stromabnehmer
  2. First off I would like to say awesome blog! I had a quick question which I’d
    like to ask if you don’t mind. I was curious to know how
    you center yourself and clear your thoughts before writing.
    I have had a difficult time clearing my thoughts in getting my thoughts
    out there. I truly do enjoy writing but it just seems like the first 10 to 15 minutes are
    wasted just trying to figure out how to begin.
    Any suggestions or hints? Many thanks!


  3. Chet, a great question, even better than an explicitly philosophical one. I really don’t exactly know. All I know is that at some point thinking becomes autonomous and then thinking and writing become one. I think the problem you are mentioning is quite natural at the beginning of the philosophical journey. At the beginning thoughts are foggy, writing is sub-optimal, you don’t even know that if this is how you should think or write, or you should go for an entirely different endeavor. The only advice i can give you is to keep writing and write more. Share the writing with friends who can objectively criticize you. Take those criticism into account and write again. Repeat this process until you feel at home in your thoughts and your thoughts become not only your opinions but objective and thus challengeable ideas in a public domain. Once you become the best critic of yourself, this is when you know that you and your thoughts have fundamentally changed.


  4. Also if you don’t mind, a word of advice: Never put yourself in a position in which you will be affirmed and cheered by the likeminded people and friends. Always seek what you think is the best and most challenging opposition. Your philosophical enemies are your best friends. Put yourself in the position of complete intellectual insecurity, that is the only way you can think and think better. Once you become your own worst critical enemy, you should know that you have become a philosopher.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s