Philosophical Multicore

Sometimes controversial, sometimes fallacious, sometimes thought-provoking, and always fun.

Archive for the ‘Reading and Writing’ Category

Most Essays Are Backwards!

Posted by Michael Dickens on April 16, 2011

I suppose this essay is ironic, since it explains why a certain type of essay is overused while using that very type of essay. Perhaps this irony reinforces the point that this essay style is not useless—in fact, it is quite useful—but simply overused.

But I’m getting ahead of myself. Most essays written for a class are written as editorials: they are designed to argue for a particular point. Even supposedly ‘analytical’ essays are supposed to take a position on their subject and then explain the evidence for that position. The problem with this lies in the thesis statement.

The thesis statement of an essay gives the main argument of the essay. In these sorts of essays it is always found close to the beginning, usually in the first paragraph. This is useful when you already know what your main point is going to be, as is the case in this essay. But often you do not know what you are going to say before you say it. Often, the point of an essay is not to express ideas you’ve already had but to actually come up with new ideas. When I wrote Morality in the Real World, I didn’t know how I was going to explain the difference between strict and practical morality until I wrote the essay and figured it out. What you might call the “thesis” doesn’t appear until halfway through. Even The Ethics of Crime and Punishment, which follows a fairly “normal” essay structure, certainly does not put the thesis in the first paragraph. (The thesis is really easy to find because it’s in bold.)

So why shouldn’t we put our thesis statements in the opening paragraph? What’s wrong with that?

Well, often there is nothing wrong with it. But there’s nothing wrong with putting it somewhere else, either, depending on what you’re trying to do with your essay. If it’s only five paragraphs and you’re writing your essay as an editorial, there’s not really anywhere to put it except at the end of the opening paragraphs. But the best essays are rarely only five paragraphs long.

Persuasive essays are common, and it usually makes sense to tell the reader early on what you’re trying to persuade him to believe. But if your essay is exploratory rather than persuasive then it makes no sense to put the thesis statement near the beginning because you don’t know what you’re going to discover until you write the essay.

Recently I was writing an exploratory essay about a poem in which I was required to include a thesis statement. I had read the poem and had a general idea of what my essay was going to be about, so I crafted a thesis based on what I knew. Then I proceeded to write the essay, and the process of writing caused me to look at the poem in a completely different light. When I looked back at my thesis statement, I realized that half of it was naive and the other half explicitly disagreed with the conclusions I reached in the last paragraph of my essay. The thesis, which was supposed to be the first thing I would write, ended up being the last thing. It made more sense that way, since only after I had written the essay did I really know what it was about.

So why do we continue to require that essays be structured with the thesis at the beginning? Why do all essays even need to have a thesis? I’m all for persuasive essays, but other types deserve some love too.

Posted in Reading and Writing | 1 Comment »

A Parenthetical Writing

Posted by Michael Dickens on November 29, 2010

This parenthetical writing is a proof of concept designed to show how it is possible to sustain a paragraph using no punctuation other than parentheses (and apostrophes for contractions) and still have it be perfectly legible (to an extent (of course (because it is impossible to be perfectly legible when using parentheses (for we as a culture are not adjusted to using only parentheses for punctuation (and for good reason (it is impractical to write using only parentheses (but it is possible (as I intend to prove (although I should probably tell you what inspired this writing (I was thinking about imperative versus functional programming (and I realized that the English language is almost entirely imperative (it works as a list of statements or instructions (rather than a series of functions that call each other (but using parentheses it is possible to have language flow in a more functional way (with statements contained inside of each other instead of being written out in sequence (functional programming languages are generally considered to be better than imperative languages (so it seems as though functional speech would be considered to be better than imperative speech (but this theory must be wrong since this paragraph is so confusing to read (except maybe language is easier when written using more parentheses (it’s just that we are not used to seeing all these parentheses (and (of course) they have to be taken in moderation (and not piled on top of each other for such a ridiculously long time (like I’ve been doing (but there may actually be something to this idea of writing with more parentheses (but not this many (because at a point it’s just too much)))))))))))))))))))))))))).

Posted in Reading and Writing | 4 Comments »

Depth and Insight

Posted by Michael Dickens on September 23, 2010

Let us consider art in the broadest sense. Let us assume it to include visual art, music, prose, poetry, performing arts, and any other medium that could be considered art.

The two primary measures by which the merit of art is judged are depth and insight.

The core purpose of art is to provide insight into the nature of some aspect of reality or humanity. The quality of this insight is the first criterion by which art is judged. Crime and Punishment is considered high art because it provides insights into morality and human nature, whileSports Illustrated is not considered a high art because its insights are about sports, which are generally considered to be not as broad or important. The long-term purpose of a piece of art is to provide one or more insights, and the merit of the art depends on the quality of these insights.

The second measure of art is how effectively it serves to cover each insight: that is, depth. The deeper a work of art delves into a particular insight, the more valuable it is. The Da Vinci Code may provide some insights into human nature, but they are very limited and shallow and thus the novel is not as valuable as an art form as Crime and Punishment is.

What is the reason for the importance of these two measures? The answer has to do with the purpose of art. In the end, the reason why we like art is because it makes us happy. Low arts such as The Da Vinci Code make us happy in the short term. High arts make us happy in the long term, by provoking thought or giving our minds room to grow. The best way to promote growth is to provide insight; and the deeper the insight, the more growth there can be.

Posted in Reading and Writing | Leave a Comment »

A New Kind of Writing

Posted by Michael Dickens on August 27, 2010

People have been writing about things for thousands of years. Sumerians wrote cuneiform scripts, Egyptians used hieroglyphs, the Chinese wrote on bones and turtle shells. Over time, more sophisticated writing utensils began to develop. But writing was still difficult. Copies had to be transcribed by hand. In the 15th century Gutenberg invented the printing press, forever changing the way people would relate to written works. It suddenly became much easier to transcribe and distribute many copies of books.

Then, with the advent of the internet, writing changed yet again. It suddenly became possible to transmit text without paper, to transmit it over vast distances in virtually no time at all. First books had to be written by hand; then, with the printing press, they could be quickly copied; now, they can be instantly viewed from anywhere in the world.

Writing isn’t just limited to books, either. Newspapers and magazines have started publishing online. The internet goes even beyond that, though: whole new media of writing have emerged, media which have changed the way we relate to knowledge.

One example of an underrated benefit of the internet is the hyperlink. If you want to refer to something from a physical paper, you have to add a footnote or endnote with a reference to the relevant work. If the reader wants to follow up of the referral, she has to find the referenced work — this could involve a trip to the library, getting a subscription to a magazine or journal, or even more.

The internet solves this problem. Now, in order to refer to another work, you simply post a link to it (provided that your source is somewhere on the web). This vastly simplifies the process of citation. I think this is far more significant than it gets credit for. The ease with which one can verify claims and find additional resources is mind-blowing compared to the old days of physical paper. Not many sites are taking full advantage of this just yet, but we’re getting there. For example, I was reading an article in Psychology Today and noticed that their online articles often contained links to other articles by other authors on the Psychology Today website. That’s just one example of good utilization of hyperlinks.

Hyperlinks are just one of the many benefits of publishing on the internet. Unlike the printing press, the internet is a relatively new invention. We are only just beginning to discover its potential. I would like to discuss one medium in particular: the blog. A blog can be about virtually anything, from cooking to security to sidewalk chalk math to debate (and whatever else the author decides to write about) to creationism and cephalopods to nothing. [Side note: it took me over twenty minutes to decide which examples to use and how to arrange them.] Many newspapers, such as the New York Times, actually hire people to write blogs for them. Some news sites are actually blogs in disguise (or not in disguise).

When blogs started out they were underutilized, but these days they are used to communicate about serious topics. One big advantage to the blog format is its flexibility: it can be just some guy’s daily journal, or it can take the form of a news report. One thing I’d like to see more of, though, is philosophy.

A blog is an ideal format for the development of philosophical ideas. Blog philosophy is very different from sitting all day in a large armchair and musing about the nature of the universe, then publishing something every few years or so (although, admittedly, I do sometimes write blog posts while in an armchair). A blog allows for good discussions and rapid feedback. It can serve as a single place to develop many philosophical ideas, ranging from the humble to the grandiose. A blog, at least the way it’s represented today, is less than ideal for publishing longer works; but it’s great for writing shorter, more concentrated essays. It’s actually very possible that a blog could be adapted to hold something as long as a book; it’s just that there aren’t many people writing books on blogs so the format hasn’t had much opportunity to adapt itself.

My own experience with a blog has been nothing short of lifechanging. It’s remarkable that I am able to come up with an idea and still have it years later, because I published it on my blog. I didn’t used to be much into writing down my ideas, and even if I had been I’m far too messy to be able to find anything I wrote down more than a few months ago. But with a blog, I have been able to formulate my ideas and can see their progression over time. Even the best of my earlier essays were less in-depth than some of my more recent ones, and I’m sure in a few years I’ll think the same thing about the essays I write today. I find it intriguing to be able to go back and trace the evolution of my ideas and my philosophy.

If there’s one piece of advice I could give to anyone interested in philosophy, it would be this: Start a blog.

Posted in Reading and Writing | 1 Comment »

Article of the Day: The Age of the Essay

Posted by Michael Dickens on April 4, 2010

Another wonderful Paul Graham essay. This one is about high school essays.

Remember the essays you had to write in high school? Topic sentence, introductory paragraph, supporting paragraphs, conclusion. The conclusion being, say, that Ahab in Moby Dick was a Christ-like figure.

Graham explains that the reason why high schoolers write essays about literature is because, a few hundred years ago, literature and essays got merged into one subject. And the reason that all essays must take a position and defend it is that essays were originally written in law school.

If we step outside of these restraints, what is the ideal essay like? What kinds of essays should teachers assign? First, there’s nothing wrong with assigning essays where one analyzes a piece of literature. Considering how students are frequently already studying literature, it’s a rather convenient topic. But there are certainly other topics out there. In addition, not all essays need to take a side and defend it. (Read Graham’s essay for more about this.) Essays could be explorations of the literature; the student would learn just as much, if not more.

Students should be given the opportunity to write essays about exploration. I have rarely gotten these sorts of chances in school. But if you read some of the longer essays on my blog, you may notice that I propose something, play around with it, maybe reject it and expand on it more. Then I go on to the next idea. This is because I am not planning these essays out in advance. I just write as I go; and I get my thoughts organized in a nice, convenient format. My school essays are completely different: focused, rigorously organized, and, if you ask me, a lot more boring.

Not that there is a problem with persuasive essays. They’re great. But, as Graham pointed out, being right is more important than being able to argue well (at least in school). So why do we learn how to take a strong with-us-or-against-us position and defend it to the death, but we don’t write essays where we explore the answers in a much more open way?

I propose that traditional English classes spend one month per semester working on writing essays. Perhaps throughout the year there are essays written about the literature being read, but during these blocks, there is a greater focus on writing quality essays. And to better enrich the minds of the students, these essays should be more about searching for the truth than about arguing a point. Perhaps the teacher can come with a list of widely varied topics, or let the students choose their own topics, or both. Students can write essays in response to other essays. (Which happens to be what I’m doing right now.)

I haven’t been writing essays on my blog for all that long. Before my blog, I practically never wrote essays outside of school. Now, I write them all the time; I’m still relatively new at it, though. Yet I keep doing it. Probably the reason I keep doing it is that writing essays gets thoughts into writing and helps me to thing more thoughts. When I write essays, I think of ideas as I go. Just sitting and thinking does not work quite so well.

Another aspect of writing essays that may seems trivial — but definitely is not — is that when I write essays, I stay focused on the essay. Simply sitting and thinking is not enough for some sorts of things, because I will get too distracted. But when I’m writing an essay I can focus on the topic at hand and actually come up with some pretty good ideas.

I want other students to feel this. School is about learning, right? It’s about the development of ideas? What better way to develop one’s ideas than to write essays? But I fear that the current restrictions placed on essays will leave many students dissatisfied, and they will leave school disliking essays, never realizing how useful and fun they can be.

I never truly appreciated essays until I started reading Paul Graham. This man writes about topics that I actually care about. When I read his essays, I learn something. That may be a lot of the problem with essay-reading: students read essays about topics that they don’t care about, or they read essays that don’t teach them anything. This is not how a good essay should go. A good essay should be informative and fun; also, as Graham pointed out in his own essay about essays, when you read an essay you should be surprised. A good essay is one that teaches you something, or makes you think in a new way.

If there’s one piece of advice I would give about writing essays, it would be: don’t do as you’re told. Don’t believe what you’re supposed to. Don’t write the essay readers expect; one learns nothing from what one expects. And don’t write the way they taught you to in school.

I certainly can get behind that advice. The problem with school is that you’re supposed to do what you’re told, pretty much by definition, which makes it hard to write truly good essays. I know that I have never written a truly good essay for any school assignment (by my personal standards); probably the best school essay I’ve ever written is one at the beginning of this year where we had to turn in some sort of writing sample so that the teacher could get to know our writing styles, and I turned in an essay that I had written for my blog. So even that one wasn’t really written for school.

To add on to Graham’s advice: when you write an essay, don’t write it because someone else told you to. Write for yourself. Other people may learn something by reading your essay, but the person who learns the most is you. I find that you can come up with much better ideas by writing essays than simply by thinking, and this is what can really make the art of essay-writing a fruitful one.

Posted in Article of the Day, Education, Reading and Writing | 1 Comment »

The Art of Hypertext

Posted by Michael Dickens on February 26, 2010

Much like any other sort of writing, blog writing is an art form. But one crucial part of this art form that is not found in hardly any other medium is the art of hyperlinking and hypertext: knowing exactly which words should be turned into links to other sites. Great bloggers are often identified by the quality of their hypertext.

I know of one blogger in particular who has especially impressive hypertext. She writes about scientific topics, and always provides just the right links in just the right places for you to understand what she’s talking about and to supplement her writings. You see, creating hypertext isn’t just about hyperlinking the right word, although that’s a big part of it. You have to hyperlink a word that is relevant to what the site is about, something that will give you an idea of what you’re clicking on. But there is more to it than that. Hypertext can be used to fill gaps in the reader’s knowledge base, and to provide sources for external material.

Another key trick is finding links that effectively describe what you want to describe. It is usually not too difficult to find a decent site, but to find a truly great source requires a master.

The Art of Hypertext is not simple. It is a very critical component of a blog. In fact, there should be some sort of blogging award for most dexterous usage of hypertext.

Posted in Reading and Writing | Leave a Comment »

The Five-Paragraph Essay

Posted by Michael Dickens on February 8, 2010

Many high-school and college age students have been required to write a five-paragraph essay. I myself have written dozens. This essay is purportedly the only way to write an essay, but this is obviously not true. So why is this format so often used in schools, and what are its pros and cons?

The format itself involves writing an essay that is five paragraphs long. More specifically, there is an introduction and a conclusion; the last sentence in the introduction is the thesis statement, which is the driving point of the whole essay. A good thesis divides the topic into three categories, one for each paragraph.

One major advantage to this type of essay is that it is very structured. This makes it easy to grade, and helps many students to organize their thoughts when they otherwise wouldn’t be able to come up with an essay that had any sort of logical flow. In addition, this format barely inhibits the quality of the essay (depending on the topic); it is possible to write a great essay and still follow this format.

What are the most significant difficulties with this format? Well, most obviously, sometimes you simply cannot say what you need to say in five paragraphs alone. Sometimes you just need more space. Another difficulty with this format is that it is for some purposes too rigid. A flexible format can encourage a type of thinking that is not restricted to an introduction, three main ideas, and a conclusion. An adept essay writer would often feel restricted by the five-paragraph format. At the same time, though, an adept essay writer would be able to be completely expressive in any decent format. And the five-paragraph format is, if not anything else, decent.

I can certainly understand why the five-paragraph format is frequently used, but it is not always the right solution. Students should be encouraged to diversify their writing styles. As I went over in a previous post, essayist Paul Graham denounces the five-paragraph essay as “really a list of n things for n = 3 . . . [where students are] not allowed to include the numbers, and they’re expected to spackle over the gaps with gratuitous transitions (“Furthermore…”) and cap the thing at either end with introductory and concluding paragraphs so it will look superficially like a real essay.” I don’t loathe it quite as much as Graham seems to, but it is certainly not the be-all end-all of essay formats.

By the way, it was a complete accident that I wrote this post in almost-five-paragraph essay format. Honest. You’ll notice a lack of a thesis statement, though, because those are hard to do in blog posts (and also kind of useless, since with blog essays I usually make it up as I go along).

Posted in Reading and Writing | Leave a Comment »

Article of the Day: List of N Things

Posted by Michael Dickens on January 10, 2010

Today’s article is by essayist Paul Graham, and is about all those essays you see that are made up of a list of N things. He discusses the advantages and disadvantages that such essays carry. The part that really interested me was the section near the end, regarding the five-paragraph essay that I have many times found myself required to write:

Because the list of n things is the easiest essay form, it should be a good one for beginning writers. And in fact it is what most beginning writers are taught. The classic 5 paragraph essay is really a list of n things for n = 3. But the students writing them don’t realize they’re using the same structure as the articles they read in Cosmopolitan. They’re not allowed to include the numbers, and they’re expected to spackle over the gaps with gratuitous transitions (“Furthermore…”) and cap the thing at either end with introductory and concluding paragraphs so it will look superficially like a real essay.

It is unfortunate that the only type of essay that I have been required to write for the last three years at least has been the five-paragraph essay. Such a format is acceptable, and is very effective under some circumstances, but is hardly a blanket to cover every possible topic. When I think of all the essays that I’ve written on my blog, only a handful can be put into the five-paragraph format. A lot of that is probably due to the nature of blogs, which tend to be longer and have shorter paragraphs. Still, though, there is wide variety of ways to write a blog post, and only a few of those ways involve five paragraphs, an introduction, and a conclusion.

Posted in Article of the Day, Reading and Writing | 2 Comments »

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.