June 5, 2009

| How Do You Follow The Web? >>

Julian Sanchez, “The Perils of Pop Philosophy”:

The function of the ordinary pop-science/social science/philosophy piece is to give the reader a sort of thumbnail-sketch of the findings or results of a particular sphere of study, while op-eds and radio talkers make the thumbnail case for a policy position. The latter are routinely criticised for their shrill content, but the really toxic message of contemporary opinion writing and radio is the meta-message, the implicit message contained in the form, more than any particular substantive claim. In an ordinary op-ed, the formal message is that 800 or 1000 words is adequate to establish the correct position on any question of interest…

What might be more helpful, at least in some instances, is an article that spends the same amount of space setting up the problem, and getting across exactly why it