tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5294547523454259081.post185525114633766229..comments2023-12-13T23:36:17.126-05:00Comments on Philosophy, lit, etc.: Philosophical Stylepraymonthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09799593980838361293noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5294547523454259081.post-43856001738505174492012-07-03T05:45:31.894-04:002012-07-03T05:45:31.894-04:00Thanks, Tommi. I'll look up de Gaynesford'...Thanks, Tommi. I'll look up de Gaynesford's paper.praymonthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09799593980838361293noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5294547523454259081.post-29151730599771599132012-07-03T05:33:06.735-04:002012-07-03T05:33:06.735-04:00That passage is from Blanshard's "A Verdi...That passage is from Blanshard's "A Verdict of Epiphenomenalism", in Frederick C. Dommeyer (ed.) <i>Current Philosophical Issues: Essays in Honor of Curt John Ducasse</i> (1966), pp. 118-119.<br /><br />I'm glad to see philosophical style get some attention, as I used to be really interested in it during my undergraduate days. (My master's thesis was on various impediments to Wittgenstein's being received as he would have wished, a central one being in my view his style.) If I had to recommend just one piece of writing on the subject, it would be Max de Gaynesford's 1998 "<a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-9329.00048/abstract" rel="nofollow">Philosophical Works as Objects of Aesthetic Judgment</a>", which is one of my favourite philosophical papers ever on any subject. It covers a lot of the same ground as Jim Holt's piece, but in more depth.Tommi Uschanovhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02852865209279310471noreply@blogger.com