If you're a philosopher or philosophy grad student (especially one at Baylor!), and like one of the arguments on my blog (including old ones in the archives), and would like to co-author with me a paper filling out and expanding on the argument, do email me--I am very open to such activity, as I do not have the time to do this by myself to every argument that I think might have promise. While some of the arguments are only worthy of being blogged--and some on reflection not even that--I think that scattered in the archives, as well as given more recently, there are a number of arguments that could be at the center of a paper.
Awesome! I hope you get some co-authors. I really enjoy reading your blog even though much of your work greatly exceeds my mental capacity (I am an artist by trade, so ;)
ReplyDeleteOne interesting thing about your blog is that it contains very few references to real living people. There are lots of hypothetical (non-real) people used in thought experiments. And there are some references to dead (non-living) people (e.g. Plato, Aquinas, Leibniz -- just look at the "labels"!). I am guessing this is because the purpose of the blog is to serve as a space for jotting down arguments in a rough form, not to direct them against the views of others or to point out how the argument fits into the broader philosophical landscape, whether historical or present-day, and that you tend to pursue such an approach only in published work. So I take it that the blog is more for yourself (though not entirely so), the published work more for others (or at least more for others than the blog).
ReplyDeleteRight. Some of the posts fit into an existing contemporary discussion I know of, some (most?) of them are on stuff where there probably is a contemporary discussion but I don't know it, and some are just out in left field.
ReplyDeleteI do kind of like the British(?) way of philosophical essay writing where you minimize references.