Revisiting the Controversial Category of Expository Philosophical Writing in Filipino Philosophy

IF 0.1 4区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
F. Demeterio
{"title":"Revisiting the Controversial Category of Expository Philosophical Writing in Filipino Philosophy","authors":"F. Demeterio","doi":"10.46992/pijp.24.2.a.6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper takes another look at the controversial category of expository philosophical writing in the context of Filipino philosophy. Expository philosophical writing is understood here as writing about the philosophical thoughts of a given philosopher, who is usually Wester. This paper starts with how Quito and Abulad denounced this mode of philosophical writing as inferior. With Abulad’s realization of the necessity of this mode of writing, the author took a parallel look at how he grappled with this controversial category from the late 1990s to the present. Agreeing with Abulad on the necessity of this mode of writing, this paper offers a typology of expository philosophical writing consisting of: 1) introductory/overview writing, 2) curation writing, 3) archeological writing, 4) forensic writing, 5) comparative writing, 6) polemic writing, 7) writing as a prelude to appropriation, and 8) writing in the Filipino language. This paper has two substantive sections. The first one catalogues eight typologies of expository philosophical writings together with their strengths and weaknesses. The second one sharpens further the idea of expository philosophical writing by contrasting it with related modes of philosophical writing. This paper will be useful to Filipino philosophy students, philosophy teachers, thesis advisers, and thesis panelists, as this paper attempted not only to clear away the mark of inferiority that Filipino philosophy placed on expository philosophical writing but more so to provide some guideposts on how specific types of expository philosophical writings should be pursued by Filipino researchers of philosophy.","PeriodicalId":40692,"journal":{"name":"Philosophia-International Journal of Philosophy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophia-International Journal of Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46992/pijp.24.2.a.6","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper takes another look at the controversial category of expository philosophical writing in the context of Filipino philosophy. Expository philosophical writing is understood here as writing about the philosophical thoughts of a given philosopher, who is usually Wester. This paper starts with how Quito and Abulad denounced this mode of philosophical writing as inferior. With Abulad’s realization of the necessity of this mode of writing, the author took a parallel look at how he grappled with this controversial category from the late 1990s to the present. Agreeing with Abulad on the necessity of this mode of writing, this paper offers a typology of expository philosophical writing consisting of: 1) introductory/overview writing, 2) curation writing, 3) archeological writing, 4) forensic writing, 5) comparative writing, 6) polemic writing, 7) writing as a prelude to appropriation, and 8) writing in the Filipino language. This paper has two substantive sections. The first one catalogues eight typologies of expository philosophical writings together with their strengths and weaknesses. The second one sharpens further the idea of expository philosophical writing by contrasting it with related modes of philosophical writing. This paper will be useful to Filipino philosophy students, philosophy teachers, thesis advisers, and thesis panelists, as this paper attempted not only to clear away the mark of inferiority that Filipino philosophy placed on expository philosophical writing but more so to provide some guideposts on how specific types of expository philosophical writings should be pursued by Filipino researchers of philosophy.
重新审视菲律宾哲学中有争议的说明文哲学写作范畴
本文从另一个角度审视菲律宾哲学背景下的解释性哲学写作这个有争议的范畴。阐释性哲学写作在这里被理解为关于某个特定哲学家(通常是西方人)的哲学思想的写作。本文从基多和阿布拉德如何谴责这种低劣的哲学写作模式开始。随着阿布拉德意识到这种写作方式的必要性,作者平行审视了他从20世纪90年代末到现在是如何应对这一有争议的类别的。同意Abulad关于这种写作模式的必要性,本文提供了一种解释性哲学写作的类型,包括:1)介绍/概述写作,2)策展写作,3)考古写作,4)法医写作,5)比较写作,6)辩论写作,7)作为拨款前奏的写作,8)菲律宾语写作。本文有两个实质性的部分。第一部分对说明性哲学著作的八种类型进行了分类,并分析了它们的优缺点。第二部分通过与相关哲学写作模式的对比,进一步强化了说明文哲学写作的概念。本文将对菲律宾哲学学生、哲学教师、论文顾问和论文小组成员有用,因为本文不仅试图清除菲律宾哲学对说明性哲学写作的自卑标记,而且还为菲律宾哲学研究人员应该如何追求特定类型的说明性哲学写作提供一些指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
50.00%
发文量
41
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信