Readability

Why Information Matters

by baldilocks

You’ll want your choice of non-​alcoholic bev­er­age while read­ing this.

Phi­los­o­phy can be a bit like a com­puter get­ting creakier. It starts well, deal­ing with sig­nif­i­cant and seri­ous issues that mat­ter to any­one. Yet, in time, it can get bloated and bogged down and slow. Phi­los­o­phy begins to care less about philo­soph­i­cal ques­tions than about philoso­phers’ ques­tions, which then con­sume increas­ing amounts of intel­lec­tual atten­tion. The prob­lem with philoso­phers’ ques­tions is not that they are impen­e­tra­ble to out­siders — although they often are, like any inter­nal game — but that what­ever the answers turn out to be, assum­ing there are any, they do not mat­ter, because nobody besides philoso­phers could care about the ques­tions in the first place.

This is an old prob­lem. In the six­teenth cen­tury, the French scholar and doc­tor François Rabelais sat­i­rized scholas­tic phi­los­o­phy in his Gar­gan­tua and Pan­ta­gruel. In a cat­a­logue of 139 invented book titles that he attrib­utes to the library of the Abbey of St. Vic­tor, he lists such titles as “The Niddy-​noddy of the Satchel-​loaded Seek­ers, by Friar Blind­fas­ta­tis” and “The Raver and idle Talker in cases of Conscience.”

Cen­turies later, we seem to be back to the same prob­lem. This is how phi­los­o­phy speaks today: “The Fail­ure of Class: Post­cap­i­tal­ist nar­ra­tive and tex­tual pre­cap­i­tal­ist the­ory” and “Decon­struct­ing Lyotard: Cul­tural nar­ra­tive and pre­mod­ern dede­con­struc­tivism.” Or: “As Lewis taught us in a clas­sic series of arti­cles, trope the­o­ries Get­tierise zom­bie argu­ments” and “While the con­tex­tu­al­ist dis­agrees, we still hold that sup­posed mind/​body ‘prob­lems’ can­not gen­er­ate an unac­cept­ably Rus­sel­lian pic­ture of the world.”

Do not try to under­stand these lines. I pro­duced the first two using a “Post­mod­ernism Gen­er­a­tor,” and the sec­ond two using an “Ana­lytic Phi­los­o­phy Gen­er­a­tor.” They sound like real exam­ples of con­tem­po­rary scholas­ti­cism — phi­los­o­phy talk­ing about itself to itself in its own jar­gon. Such scholas­ti­cism is the ulti­mate freez­ing of the sys­tem, the equiv­a­lent of a Win­dows computer’s “blue screen of death”: so many resources are devoted to inter­nal issues that no exter­nal input can be processed any­more, and the sys­tem stops work­ing. The world may be under­go­ing a rev­o­lu­tion, Rome may be burn­ing, but the philo­soph­i­cal dis­course remains detached, mean­ing­less, and utterly obliv­i­ous. Time for an upgrade.

Read the whole thing. Flip on your brain’s com­pre­hen­sion and appli­ca­tion switches first. It’s amaz­ing that all too many of us need to be reminded to do these things. I think that’s a sum­ma­tion of this essay.

Juli­ette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. (Her older blog is located here.) Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was pub­lished in 2012. Her sec­ond novel ten­ta­tively titled Arlen’s Harem, will be done one day soon! Fol­low her on Twit­ter and on Gab​.ai.

Please con­tribute to Juliette’s JOB: Her new novel, her blog, her Inter­net to keep the lat­ter going and COF­FEE to keep her going!

Or hit Da Tech Guy’s Tip Jar in the name of Inde­pen­dent Journalism!

by baldilocks

You’ll want your choice of non-alcoholic beverage while reading this.

Philosophy can be a bit like a computer getting creakier. It starts well, dealing with significant and serious issues that matter to anyone. Yet, in time, it can get bloated and bogged down and slow. Philosophy begins to care less about philosophical questions than about philosophers’ questions, which then consume increasing amounts of intellectual attention. The problem with philosophers’ questions is not that they are impenetrable to outsiders — although they often are, like any internal game — but that whatever the answers turn out to be, assuming there are any, they do not matter, because nobody besides philosophers could care about the questions in the first place.

This is an old problem. In the sixteenth century, the French scholar and doctor François Rabelais satirized scholastic philosophy in his Gargantua and Pantagruel. In a catalogue of 139 invented book titles that he attributes to the library of the Abbey of St. Victor, he lists such titles as “The Niddy-noddy of the Satchel-loaded Seekers, by Friar Blindfastatis” and “The Raver and idle Talker in cases of Conscience.”

Centuries later, we seem to be back to the same problem. This is how philosophy speaks today: “The Failure of Class: Postcapitalist narrative and textual precapitalist theory” and “Deconstructing Lyotard: Cultural narrative and premodern dedeconstructivism.” Or: “As Lewis taught us in a classic series of articles, trope theories Gettierise zombie arguments” and “While the contextualist disagrees, we still hold that supposed mind/body ‘problems’ cannot generate an unacceptably Russellian picture of the world.”

Do not try to understand these lines. I produced the first two using a “Postmodernism Generator,” and the second two using an “Analytic Philosophy Generator.” They sound like real examples of contemporary scholasticism — philosophy talking about itself to itself in its own jargon. Such scholasticism is the ultimate freezing of the system, the equivalent of a Windows computer’s “blue screen of death”: so many resources are devoted to internal issues that no external input can be processed anymore, and the system stops working. The world may be undergoing a revolution, Rome may be burning, but the philosophical discourse remains detached, meaningless, and utterly oblivious. Time for an upgrade.

Read the whole thing. Flip on your brain’s comprehension and application switches first. It’s amazing that all too many of us need to be reminded to do these things. I think that’s a summation of this essay.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. (Her older blog is located here.) Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2012. Her second novel tentatively titled Arlen’s Harem, will be done one day soon! Follow her on Twitter and on Gab.ai.

Please contribute to Juliette’s JOB:  Her new novel, her blog, her Internet to keep the latter going and COFFEE to keep her going!

Or hit Da Tech Guy’s Tip Jar in the name of Independent Journalism!