Comments on: Contributing off the cuff? http://www.logicmatters.net/2008/08/contributing-off-the-cuff/ Logic, enthusiasms, sceptical thoughts, and a little LaTeX geekery Mon, 06 Feb 2012 19:23:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1 By: Stefan http://www.logicmatters.net/2008/08/contributing-off-the-cuff/comment-page-1/#comment-370 Stefan Wed, 03 Sep 2008 15:02:00 +0000 http://www.logicmatters.net/?p=348#comment-370 <a HREF="http://web.ceu.hu/phil/farkas/index.html" REL="nofollow">Kati Farkas</a>, our head of department at CEU, always pushes the grad students to ask questions at colloquia (actually, we have the first question). It's supposed to be a good drill, in that it makes us think harder and faster, and pay more attention to the talk. But I'm not sure there is any real benefit for the lecturer, who usually has to gently explain some basic issues surrounding the topic of the talk. <br/><br/>Last year, for instance, we've had talks ranging from the foundations of math (Hale and Lynnebo) to the philosophy of art, and I guess no one in the department (the profs included) could claim to understand all the topics. Sure, there were discussions each and every time, some even interesting, but I very much doubt it that the audience managed to "contribute" in reasonably similar manner to all of them. Of course, we just have to wait and read the acknowledgements in the published papers to see whether I'm right or not :) Kati Farkas, our head of department at CEU, always pushes the grad students to ask questions at colloquia (actually, we have the first question). It’s supposed to be a good drill, in that it makes us think harder and faster, and pay more attention to the talk. But I’m not sure there is any real benefit for the lecturer, who usually has to gently explain some basic issues surrounding the topic of the talk.

Last year, for instance, we’ve had talks ranging from the foundations of math (Hale and Lynnebo) to the philosophy of art, and I guess no one in the department (the profs included) could claim to understand all the topics. Sure, there were discussions each and every time, some even interesting, but I very much doubt it that the audience managed to “contribute” in reasonably similar manner to all of them. Of course, we just have to wait and read the acknowledgements in the published papers to see whether I’m right or not :)

]]> By: mrcontrarian http://www.logicmatters.net/2008/08/contributing-off-the-cuff/comment-page-1/#comment-369 mrcontrarian Mon, 01 Sep 2008 21:10:00 +0000 http://www.logicmatters.net/?p=348#comment-369 I think it is possible for a non-expert to contribute to a philosophical colloquium. I'm a "younger and more energetic philosopher", albeit by autodidaction, and so perhaps I <i>would</i> think this way. My reason for thinking this is that it is possible that someone who is not deeply absorbed in a particular branch of philosophy on a daily basis can bring a fresh perspective to the subject. But it depends on the person's philosophical aptitude, and the branch of philosophy concerned. Aristotelian logic, for instance, I think is not so difficult that an intelligent non-expert can't bring themselves up to speed, but modern logic is perhaps too complicated and specialised for this. Certain subjects like aesthetics can be pretty insular, perhaps because they are less popular, and would probably benefit from the freshness of an intelligent, if naive, non-expert. I think it is possible for a non-expert to contribute to a philosophical colloquium. I’m a “younger and more energetic philosopher”, albeit by autodidaction, and so perhaps I would think this way. My reason for thinking this is that it is possible that someone who is not deeply absorbed in a particular branch of philosophy on a daily basis can bring a fresh perspective to the subject. But it depends on the person’s philosophical aptitude, and the branch of philosophy concerned. Aristotelian logic, for instance, I think is not so difficult that an intelligent non-expert can’t bring themselves up to speed, but modern logic is perhaps too complicated and specialised for this. Certain subjects like aesthetics can be pretty insular, perhaps because they are less popular, and would probably benefit from the freshness of an intelligent, if naive, non-expert.

]]>