Classical Theism, Philosophy, and Religion Forum / On Philosophical Style

**Posted by John West** 3/21/2016 12:23 pm

Lord Macauley once recorded in his diary a memorable attempt—his first and apparently also his last—to read Kant's Critique: “I received today a translation of Kant. . . . I tried to read it, but found it utterly unintelligible, just as if it had been written in Sanscrit. Not one word gave me anything like an idea except a Latin quotation from Persius. It seems to me that it ought to be possible to explain a true theory of metaphysics in words that I can understand. I can understand Locke, and Berkeley, and Hume, and Reid, and Stewart. I can understand Cicero's Academics and most of Plato; and it seems odd that in a book on the elements of metaphysics . . . I should not be able to comprehend a word.”

Brand Blanshard, On Philosophical Style (Indiana University Press, 1967), p. 1. Originally appeared in 1954. (full text [url=http://www.uta.edu/philosophy/faculty/burgess-jackson/Blanshard,%20On%20Philosophical%20Style%20(1954).pdf]here[/url])

**Posted by iwpoe** 3/21/2016 5:07 pm

Well there's also the 'translated from German' issue.

**Posted by John West** 3/21/2016 5:29 pm

Surely that's not further from English than Ancient Greek.

**Posted by iwpoe** 3/21/2016 8:55 pm

John West wrote:
Surely that's not further from English than Ancient Greek.

Plato or Aristotle? There are not a few readers who read stretches of Aristotle and haven't the faintest idea what he's trying to talk about. Though good luck with the end of Plato's Sophist.

I also object to the idea the Hume reads well. The Treatise takes an idea and spreads it so thin you might as well eat the toast plain.

Last edited by iwpoe (3/21/2016 8:59 pm)

**Posted by John West** 3/21/2016 9:02 pm

Blanshard uses Socrates and Plato as go to examples of good philosophical style.

You should read it. It's not that long, and it doesn't have to be read all at once.

**Posted by iwpoe** 3/22/2016 1:20 am

John West wrote:
You should read it.

We can't all be Goethe.

John West wrote:
It's not that long, and it doesn't have to be read all at once.

I just now saw the link. Will do.

**Posted by dingodile** 3/22/2016 11:39 am

My students complain about the translation we're using...of John Stuart Mill.

Even as a person who reads analytic philosophy for a living, there are some whose writing is so turgid that I simply refuse to commit the time needed to get through it. Brandom comes to mind.

I'm glad to have read the Blanshard essay.

**Posted by Jeremy Taylor** 3/25/2016 6:43 pm

That essay looks very interesting. I have downloaded it and will have to read it very soon.

I would also think that reading good English prose, especially essayists and nonfiction, would be useful for developing a good philosophical style. I would recommend reading a good selection from the works of Bacon, Hooker, Jeremy Taylor, Thomas Fuller, Addison, Steele, Dr. Johnson, Burke, Cobbett, Robert Louis Stevenson, Chesterton, Orwell, for a start.

I don't think it is easy to develop a good style - to a degree you are born with it - but you really have to read a lot of examples to have a shot, if it doesn't come naturally.

**Posted by Seán Mac Críodáin** 3/27/2016 1:31 am

I agree with the above comment on using good literary style to develop good philosophical style, since written philosophy is a form of literature. I don't think there's a sharp dividing line between philosophical and non-philosophical writing. Or perhaps there's no division at all! That's a point I'd like to explore.