Q&A: Suggestion: A Book on Conceptual Analysis
Suggestion: A Book on Conceptual Analysis
Question
Hello Rabbi,
This isn’t really a question, but more of a direction, suggestion, or thought that has come to me recently regarding your books and your thought.
I’m a devoted reader of your writings and usually listen to your lectures, and in my opinion one of your strengths and contributions is your ability to engage in precise preliminary conceptual analysis that maps out the tools and the possible directions. After that stage, you manage to clarify your own approach very well (and, incidentally, also those who disagree with you), and in a convincing way.
In my view, beyond the final conclusions of your position in various debates, this is what sets you apart from many other thinkers. The analytical ability to clarify positions, illuminate concepts, and disperse the fog in the discussion. That is something rare in our circles. And thank you for that.
If I may—I suggest, if you have the time and inclination, writing a systematic book on “conceptual analysis”: how to clarify concepts, what toolboxes to use, etc. etc. I’m aware that you devoted a lecture series to this, but in my opinion a systematic written treatment of the subject as a book (or a booklet in the style of the notebooks) would be an enormously helpful tool for advancing thought, the ability to discuss, and much more.
I’d be glad to hear your opinion about that.
Thank you for everything!
Answer
Many thanks. I also think this is a problematic topic, and it is important to improve things in this area. But my impression is that nowadays books are no longer an effective medium. Few people read them, and the effort involved in publishing them is very great. I try to promote the issue here on the site and in various articles that I write, and of course also in the series.
Discussion on Answer
I’ve now uploaded a column that touches on this: 637.
Okay, I understand what you’re saying. It may really be that the effort is immeasurably greater, and that the benefit has declined compared to earlier times. That is certainly plausible.
And yet—a post, or even a series of posts, is not the same as a systematic book. It’s hard to shape a foundational worldview through posts. That’s not the platform. People read posts from time to time as refreshing points for thought. A book, by contrast, is something one approaches in order to shape a foundational worldview.
It’s hard for me to see someone changing basic assumptions through a post, especially when in the post there are references to look at this other post and from there to some article, and there is no real order or broad overall picture. In a book, on the other hand, everything is laid out in full, each thing in its proper place.
Maybe in terms of quantity more people read posts, but in terms of quality it is clear to me that books have the advantage. And you, who deal with the quality of ideas, are more suited to the world of books. That’s also how I understand the repeated requests from readers to shorten the posts. And you keep responding and arguing that your method is to proceed systematically from the foundations, and for that there is no avoiding length. You are basically trying to bring into posts (which are meant to be relatively short and require less mental effort) the content of books. But that is a bit impossible. The blanket is too short either way.
In any case, I’m speaking about myself, and perhaps I’m mistaken.