William Irwin

Reading Audio Books

I hide my audio book habit because most of my colleagues, and even some of my snobbier students, regard audio books as a sign of an impending dark age of mass illiteracy. Feeling uneasy, I wonder: when The Brothers Karamazov comes up in conversation am I obliged to “confess” that I listened to the unabridged audio book, but did not silently read the massive tome? Is there a difference that makes a difference between listening to an audio book and reading a printed book?

Writing for the Reader: A Defense of Philosophy and Popular Culture Books

There are some risks in producing public philosophy. We don’t want to misrepresent the work of philosophy or mislead readers into thinking they have learned all they need to know from a single, short book or article. The potential benefits, though, outweigh the risks. Public philosophy can disseminate important ideas and enhance appreciation for the difficult and complex work of philosophers. Popular writing is often less precise, lacking in fine detail and elaboration, but it can still be accurate (in the sense of being “on target”). People often need a simplified account to get an initial understanding. Whatever one thinks of the role of jargon in scholarly writing, its place should be minimal in popular writing. If physicists can write books of popular science with virtually no equations, philosophers can write books for a general audience with limited jargon. Public philosophy, such as the Blackwell Philosophy and Pop Culture Series that I edit, has its share of critics. Elsewhere I have explained and defended the interpretation of pop culture as a vehicle for disseminating philosophy. 1 On this occasion I would like to take the opportunity to defend the style of presentation and the simplification of ideas and arguments that is common to my series and other works of public philosophy. Public philosophy takes a hit from some academic critics who disparage its style of writing as attention-seeking simplification. Many critics don’t regard it as philosophy at all. 2 Maybe it’s not. Maybe it’s more like reporting on philosophy. But does Stephen Hawking’s A Brief History of Time count as science? Even if it doesn’t, it certainly serves the worthwhile purpose of explaining the cosmos in a way that is accessible and interesting to the general public. Hawking’s book is remarkable not just for its success but for its surprising lack of Essays Philos (2014)15:1 Irwin | 78 mathematics. If Hawking can explain physics without equations, then certainly philosophers can explain metaphysics without symbolic logic. It’s a challenge, though, in ways that critics may not realize. It is easier to explain physics using mathematics because much of the work has already been done by the reader in coming to understand the mathematics. The physics in A Brief History of Time may be simplified, shorn as it is of mathematical apparatus, but only a pedant would complain that it is inaccurate as a result. The average reader gets a valid sense of the subject matter and many have been inspired to learn more. So if physics can be simplified appropriately for a general audience, then why not philosophy? Popular writing is often less precise, lacking in fine detail and elaboration, but it can still be accurate (in the sense of being “on target”). People often need a simplified account to get an initial understanding. Later, with their interest prompted, they can learn the more complex version. So, for example, a work of public philosophy may not consider every possible way in which utilitarianism can be refined to meet the objections of its critics, but to demand that it do so is to miss the point. The point is to make it accessible so that ideas can spread beyond the ivory tower. One of the aims of writing for the Blackwell series is to teach without being “teachy.” That is, we don’t want to be pedantic or preachy. We are not aiming for the scholarly innovation of academic journal articles, nor are we producing classroom lectures. Rather, we are aiming to create a sense of discovery. The best popular writing often makes the reader feel like a collaborator in figuring things out, which, of course, is often true of the best classroom teaching as well. None of this is easy. Consider the plight of Plato’s escaped prisoner who returns to the cave from the world outside and is not able to make out the shapes of the shadows on the wall. His eyes must readjust to see the shadows; he must speak in terms of them if he is to communicate effectively. This is the task of philosophers in writing for the public. Having learned the jargon and rules of discourse for academic philosophy, they must take what they have learned in that form and translate it into the language of everyday life. This is the only way they can hope to both teach and be taught by their non-academic readers and interlocutors. Some critics may complain, though, that we should not speak in terms of the shadows. Philosophy is difficult by its very nature and any attempt to simplify it or make it easy just distorts the subject matter. Of course it is true that, for example, the mind-body problem is complex and that no easy answers suggest themselves. But that does not mean that public philosophy should avoid an elementary discussion of the mind-body problem in which some attempted solutions are presented in their most basic form. We all need to start somewhere in developing our understanding of the problem. Some people might like the experience of Essays Philos (2014)15:1 Irwin | 79 being thrown into the deep end of the pool and being forced to swim, but most prefer to begin where the water is not over their heads. Still, it may be objected, by presenting a simplified version of philosophy we risk sending the message to readers that this is “all you need to know.” Admittedly, there is some risk of this, but it is the same risk that we take in teaching Introduction to Philosophy. The clear message of the intro course and of most public philosophy is that this is not all you need to know, but rather that this is an introduction, one that will hopefully prompt you to want to know more. On a related note, some critics are concerned that simplified accounts of philosophy make the discipline appear frivolous and undermine the hard work of professional philosophers. Such concerns are misplaced, however. No one thinks physics is frivolous after reading popular science books. If professional philosophy is misperceived as frivolous, we need to look elsewhere for the source of the misperception. Nonetheless, some critics will maintain that nothing worthwhile comes easy, so philosophy should be hard. Wrestling with ideas is hard enough, though. In doing public philosophy we don’t need to compound the difficulty by presenting the ideas in needlessly complex forms and prose. People need to walk before they can run; they need an elementary version of philosophy before moving on to a more advanced discussion. Lack of clarity in philosophical prose is sometimes claimed as necessary because of the nature of philosophy. But this is rarely so. Analytic and continental philosophy may seem to be divided in part on the issue of clarity where analytic philosophy strives for clarity and continental philosophy seems to revel in obscurity. But this characterization is facile, and even if it were accurate it would make little difference to the average person who finds them both impenetrable. Thus, in my capacity as editor of the Blackwell Philosophy and Pop Culture Series, I am open to any topic, issue, or problem addressed by either analytic or continental philosophy (or any other tradition) as long as the author can explain it in terms that are interesting and intelligible to the average reader. No philosophical topic is automatically excluded from consideration, though many topics in academic philosophy are of interest almost exclusively to other philosophers who are already interested in a particular field or issue. Just as not every topic works well in most Introduction to Philosophy courses, so too not every topic works well in most public philosophy books. Most professors do not teach Wittgenstein, Heidegger, modal logic, or deconstruction in their intro courses. But some do, and some of these have success. Likewise, such topics can be considered in public philosophy books; we simply need to be careful in doing so. Style and presentation matter. Essays Philos (2014)15:1 Irwin | 80 Writing with a sense of fun or with an irreverent sense of humor is verboten in academic philosophy, but it is just the kind of thing that enlivens a work of public philosophy and elicits the good will of readers. The writing itself can be fun but it is not easy. Fred Astaire is often praised as making dancing look easy, but no one worked as hard as Astaire to make it look easy. Following in Astaire’s footsteps, the ideal for the public philosopher is to produce a text that reads so easily that it seems to have been written easily. By contrast, many philosophers assume that because something is difficult to read it must have been difficult to write. Sometimes that is true, but it does not necessarily mean that the author could not have worked even harder to make the text easier to read and comprehend. It seems that the more established a philosopher becomes, the more entitled s/he feels to produce writing that will require an inordinate amount of work to read and comprehend. Indeed, s/he may even feel this is what is expected. By contrast, in writing chapters for the Blackwell Philosophy and Pop Culture Series authors are asked to be ever mindful of the reader. We want the reader to wrestle with ideas not prose. Referring to William Strunk in the introduction to The Elements of Style, E.B. White writes that “Will felt the reader was in serious trouble most of the time, a man floundering in a swamp, and that it was the duty of anyone attempting to write English to drain this swamp quickly and get his man up on dry ground, or at least throw him a rope.” 3 It is Strunk’s sensitivity to the plight of the reader that should drive us to pay attention to “elements of style” that ordinarily do not concern philosophers in their academic writing. In academic journal articles and books, introductions are rarely enticing. They largely take for granted that the reader is already interested in reading the text and simply provide a roadmap of what lies ahead. In public philosophy, by contrast, we cannot take the reader’s interest for granted. In

Sons of Anarchy and Philosophy: Brains Before Bullets

INTERNATIONAL 510 GRAIN DRILL MANUAL, Jan Van Noordt Painter of History and Portraits in Amsterdam, microeconomics unit 4 answer key, Popular Culture in Ancient Rome, Dolci Di Love, Yale Mpb040acn24c2748 Schematic, textbook of pediatric emergency medicine pdf, Molecular Evolution and Adaptive Radiation, Corduroy Goes to the Beach, Suite Antillana for Solo Guitar, paris rutherford satb, NCOA SUMMATIVE TEST ANSWERS, Music A Living Language, Best Fairy Stories of the World, john fleming explicit teaching model, denise tarlinton contracts, Civil Wars, Rainbow Famous Jataka Tales 4, Joy of Cooking 75th Anniversary Edition, Indian Business, Sketches of Eminent Statesmen and Writers Vol. 2 With Other Essays, Quick-Knit Throws, Prayers that Rout the demons John Eckhardt, film art an introduction 10th edition bordwell pdf , Economic History of India, Underguound Space Utilisation, Numismatic Researches Critical Studies from Excavated Context 1st Edition, Menopause Madness An Empathetic Little Book, The Complete Poems, INEXORABLE MODERNITY: JAPAN's GRAPPLING WITH MODERNITY IN THE ARTS, Magick Made Easy Charms Spells Potions and Power, A Groom of One's Own, Mies Van Der Rohe's Farnsworth, Sonia Delaunay Rythmes et Couleurs, Urban Babies Wear Black (An Urban Babies Wear Black Book), 1634: The Ram Rebellion (The Assiti Shards), The Model Railroader's Guide to Diesel Locomotives, English 3b Answers To Ple Platoweb, Aryans and Hindu Women, Palestine The Right Of Return, INTRODUCTION TO MATLAB FOR ENGINEERS PALM SOLUTIONS, Constructing Peace Lessons from UN Peacebuilding Operations in El Salvador and Cambodia, All About Christmas Traditions Customs Legends and Meditations, teach them spanish grade 4, Gymnastic Coach Training Manual, Manual Audiophile Ford, Winning in the Trenches A Lifetime of Football, THE RED NOTEBOOK, Oil Turmoil and Islam in the Middle East, Party Competition An Agent-Based Model

Ender's Game and Philosophy: The Logic Gate is Down

A threat to humanity portending the end of our species lurks in the cold recesses of space. Our only hope is an eleven-year-old boy. Celebrating the long-awaited release of the movie adaptation of Orson Scott Card’s novel about highly trained child geniuses fighting a race of invading aliens, this collection of original essays probes key philosophical questions raised in the narrative, including the ethics of child soldiers, politics on the internet, and the morality of war and genocide.

Black Sabbath & philosophy : mastering reality

Introduction: What Is This That Stands Before Me? x Acknowledgments: They Sold Their Souls for Rock n Roll xii Part I Necessary Evil 1 1 Beyond Good and Evil: Facing Your Demons With Black Sabbath and Existentialism 3 William Irwin 2 Masters of a Better Possible Reality: Conquering Evil With Love 12 Liz Stillwaggon Swan 3 Is It the End, My Friend? Black Sabbath s Apocalypse of Horror 20 Brian Froese Part II Playing Devil s Advocate 31 4 Black Sabbath and the Sound of Evil 33 Joel McIver 5 The Worst of All Possible Worlds: Schopenhauer Meets Sabbath 41 James Heathers 6 Tony Iommi s Hand of Doom: From Plastic Fingertips to Creative Freedom 51 Ken Pepper Part III The Dark Art of Metal 61 7 The Art of Black Sabbath: Aristotle Joins the Band 63 Greg Littmann 8 Black Sabbath and the Problem of Defining Metal 76 Soren R. Frimodt-Moller 9 Saint Vitus Dance: The Art of Doom 87 Manuel Bremer and Daniel Cohnitz 10 Gods, Drugs, and Ghosts: Finding Dionysus and Apollo in Black Sabbath and the Birth of Heavy Metal 96 Dennis Knepp Part IV Is It Still Sabbath Without Ozzy? 111 11 It s Not Sabbath Unless Ozzy s the Singer (But It s Fine If You Disagree) 113 James Bondarchuk 12 Fightin Words: Sabbath Doesn t Need the Ozzman 126 Wesley D. Cray 13 The Name Remains the Same But Should It? 140 Mark D. White Part V Symptoms of The Universe 149 14 Wicked World: The Politics of the Supernatural in Black Sabbath 151 Erich Christiansen 15 Demons, Dreamers, and Madmen : Is Ozzy Going Insane? 163 Kevin McCain 16 As the War Machine Keeps Turning : Just War Theory, Pacifism, and the War on Terror 171 Jacob M. Held 17 Stop Stereotyping Sabbath: Sex, Subjugation, and Stupidity 182 Robert Arp Contributors: Children of the Grave 190 Index: The Writ 195