Introduction
Over the course of history, books have been lauded
as the primary source of knowledge, and so have taken the primary spotlight in
the collection and presentation of knowledge. However, there has been a new
contender to that position, a new style of writing which has slowly achieved
some popularity even among scientific journals. This style is known as the
article, the editorial, the abstract, or more commonly known as, the essay.
This switch to essay applies as well to me, as I
have more commonly attempted to write long manuscripts in the effort to express
my thoughts. The background to this switch from manuscripts to essays are the
apparent failures of the manuscript approach, and the alluring advantages of
the essay over the manuscript. Let us begin with the furthest background, my
philosophical endeavor.
As a human being with the natural tendency to be
curious, philosophy has taken me and driven me to seek it further. As I strive
to destroy the old order and begin anew, there must be a form that this new
philosophy takes, that is through the written word. With that reason, I
attempted to bring forth my philosophical opinions on long manuscripts.
Unfortunately I failed to continue the manuscripts after finishing only two
manuscripts, on metaphysics and ethics.
It is true that the failure of the manuscript
approach lies not within the quantity of the writing rather the quality of
writing. If the quantity is low, but the quality high, then we can say that is
still a success. As the success or failure of any writing is determined by
whether that piece of writing fulfills its intended purpose, or not, in other
words, the quality of the writing. From that, I can conclusively determine and
claim that my manuscripts fail its intended purpose.
The purpose of the manuscript as a piece of writing
is to explain clearly and logically my philosophy. On the other hand, my
manuscripts fail to do so, and instead complicate things. To understand the
true nature of its failure, I shall explain the full chronology of it. In the
beginning, I had many ideas on philosophy that I wish to write, and the bounty
of ideas means there is less effort to write an entire, or two manuscripts on
it.
At that time, I was operating on the paradigm of
writing as much as possible, instead of writing as well as possible. What this
means is the manuscripts were written in haste and pressure, and so the ideas
and the quality of language was not reevaluated or reexamined. This would soon
become a ticking time bomb as my awareness of the importance of structure and
logical coherence grows, and my ideas grow rare and lessen over time.
After some time writing my second manuscript on
ethics, it dawned me that not one, but two critical points in my philosophy are
logically flawed. Then I began to realize the importance of planning my writing
and also structuring it properly. Next, due to those frustrations, I am simply
unable to obtain more ideas on what to write, as I simply can not continue to
write on an unstable foundation. With that, the time bomb exploded.
On the 2nd of December, 2019, as I was trying to
continue my manuscripts, I saw through my writings that they were chaotic, had
no structure, and had many flaws in their logic. I thought I could salvage it
by backtracking my way to the beginning, it failed. With that, my mind broke
down as the philosophical tower of Babel collapsed due to its own height,
weight, and its improper architecture and structure, or the lack thereof even.
The consequences of that collapse is the approach of
writing manuscripts can no longer be sustained and the philosophical line of
reasoning must also be started from the beginning again. It means that I must
write again from the very beginning my system of philosophy, and the
manuscripts are effectively “discarded”. Looking at hindsight, I can identify
two main factors which caused this collapse.
The first factor is the unlimited scope of ideas
covered within each manuscript. It is true that each manuscript, the two of
them, has a single topic more or less covering it. For example, metaphysics,
however that topic is not limited enough, as such the manuscript covers too
much and ironically does not cover enough. That is of course a less grave
concern than the depth of the ideas covered.
When there are many ideas being juggled within a
wholly new manuscript, chances are the ideas will be discussed generally and
not given the proper justification it requires. This is exactly what happened
with my manuscripts, many ideas, too general, not enough justification, and the
tower collapses. Of course given enough planning and time, a manuscript which
has clear boundaries, many ideas, and still have a certain amount of depth to
it can certainly be written. As such we move on to the second factor, haste.
I was writing these manuscripts under a fear of not
having enough time in this life, and so was rushing through them with the
intent of finishing as much as possible. Since the beginning there has been a
rational voice reminding me that I certainly need to plan this instead of
rushing and that with my current status as a high school student, I should not
be obsessed with this and balance it with my studies, in short I ignored that
voice and I paid the price.
I can say that this second factor of haste, rushing,
and fear of not having enough time is what truly destroyed my manuscripts. As
the focus was on quantity and not quality, I did not pay attention on the
actual quality of each individual idea I wrote, and with more flaws in the
system, it reached a critical point where it can not be recovered. If I had
been more patient, the first factor would not be a problem at all, though with
my new realizations I still opt for essays instead of manuscripts.
With that it can be said that the combination of the
unlimited scope of ideas and the paradigm of fear, rush, and haste lead to the
various flaws in my manuscripts, which lead to its downfall and collapse. The
collapse was such that the manuscripts can not be recovered at all, and as the
inherent structure and quality of ideas in the manuscripts are flawed, a new
approach of writing must be used, and that new approach is the essay.
Therefore this first essay among all essays shall
have the following purposes. That is to establish the essay as the standard
form of writing for all of my writings, to elaborate upon the characteristics
of the essay and my plans for the essay approach, and finally the reasoning to
why I prefer essays as my main form of writing instead of long manuscripts.
Essay
It is difficult to create a specific definition of
an essay, that which specifies the structure or contents of the essay.
Moreover, many people may have different views on what an essay is, for that
reason I will give my own definition of the essay. The essay is a “brief” piece
of writing, focusing on one specific idea and the development of that idea,
with the sole purpose of expressing the author’s personal opinion on the
subject matter of the essay, that is the idea.
I mentioned “brief” as the brevity of an essay is
commonly a relative thing. One may create texts as long as John Locke’s “An
Essay Concerning Human Understanding” or Thomas Malthus’ “An Essay on the
Principle of Population” or as brief as Montaigne’s pioneer essays. The brevity
of the essay is not determined by the length of words and pages, rather the
brevity of the idea, that the essay has a specific focus on just one idea, with
clear boundaries and purposes.
How do we limit that idea though? “One” idea can be
defined, in my opinion, as an argument, a single independent coherent argument.
This argument seeks to prove or reach a point of understanding on the topic,
and has a starting point, the actual argumentation, and the conclusions. As the
essays contains only one argument, the consequence and expectation is for this
essay to perfect the argument it delivers and explore the argument fully so
that it may be a strong argument, able to withstand counter arguments.
This is what differentiates the essay from various
other genres of writing. While other texts may cover broader ranges of ideas,
or cover single ideas but briefly, an essay covers the full extent of one
single idea. In comparison to my failed manuscripts, the essay covers just a
bit, but it is enough. Due to this focus, a well written and well planned essay
may become a very enjoyable reading and more importantly a logically clear and
powerful tool as a method of analysis and obtaining knowledge.
A primary strategy to achieve such focus and clarity
is through the structure of the essay. Structure is defined as the arrangement
of things, but in this context it means specifically the arrangement and
organization of language for the achievement of the purpose of the essay. That
purpose being to express the personal argument of the author clearly and
logically, or to prove and reach a point of understanding.
The structure of the essay is not only a structure
of language, but reflects the internal logical structure of ideas within a
single argument, that is how various ideas connect to each other to form one
single coherent idea, that is the argument of the essay. Because of that
language-idea correlation, the structure is useful not just for the readers but
also for the author so he/she may understand better their own ideas.
A good structure must be identifiable, meaning its
components are identifiable to make any criticism and examination easier, and
it must flow from one paragraph to the next. This represents how every idea is
connected from the beginning to the end, and so a good structure with good
transition of language will represent the actual development and evolution of
the argument as it begins from the starting point and finally reach its end
conclusion.
If we succeed in structuring our essay clearly and
coherently, even if our ideas are not the brightest, then the essay would
already have a sufficiently high quality to still be enjoyed reading and would
make constructive criticism and analysis much easier. Combined with the focus
of idea, then the essay would have reached its maximum potential as a form of
expression and also a method of analysis and collection of knowledge.
Is there any limit to the scope of topics that can
be discussed in an essay? The answer is, there is almost no, or perhaps no
limits at all. This is because the definition or the essence of the essay is
not the content of the writing, such as a biography or a short story or a news
article, rather the form of writing. That form limit is that an essay focuses
on a single idea or argument and has a clear identifiable structure which
represents the development of that idea or argument.
However, there is still a very minor content limit
in an essay, that is it is the author’s opinion or argument on a certain topic.
This differentiates it with many other forms of writing which are more often than
not, are descriptive or mostly objective. What this means is the essay is not
just a description of an event, or a purely objective analysis, but also the
author’s personal and sometimes subjective opinion and argument on that
objective description.
That limit is of course rather insignificant, as
there is no more limits to what topic can be commented or analysed. It means
that the essay is highly flexible as a form of writing, as the topics discussed
can range from highly serious to highly casual, from the wide social issues to
small private problems, and from objective criticism to subjective beliefs. This
makes an essay a very effective tool to tackle various problems of life, as
there is no limit to what can be tackled.
All the characteristics mentioned above show how an
essay is more effective in the expression of thought and the proving or
achievement of a point of understanding than the manuscript. For the very
least, for what the essay seeks to achieve it is more effective. What that
means is the manuscript is not abandoned, however to create a good manuscript
or book then you need to have a well planned set of ideas. The essay is the
means to plan those ideas.
As such, an essay can be considered to be the
preparation for the manuscript, which nonetheless can still be enjoyed alone
without the manuscript or other essays. A manuscript consists of various
interconnected ideas, while those singular ideas are first discussed individually
in their respective essays. This method, while seemingly takes more time,
actually takes just the same amount or even less time. As when we perfect the
individual essays, we perfect the individual ideas which will become the
building blocks of the manuscript. Once all essays are done, we simply have to
adapt them to the manuscript, instead of planning an entire manuscript from the
beginning.
It is for those reasons that I shall use the essay
as my primary method of writing, whereas the manuscript becomes a final work
summarizing and tying up all of my essays. The essay, which focus on a single
idea, has clear structure, and has high flexibility makes it a powerful tool in
analyzing and exploring individual ideas perfectly and credibly. On the other
hand, the manuscript is the final product after the essay, as a form of summary
or final work connecting all the essays. To achieve that quality of essay, a
primary strategy is through the structure and for that reason I shall move on
to discussing the structure.
Structure
A good essay depends mostly on the quality of its
structure. As I have mentioned before, an essay with low quality ideas, if
presented with a generally decent structure may still make for a decent essay. Of
course the structure does not make the idea more logical or more coherent, but
it may help us in identifying the flaws of such idea, thus fulfilling the
purpose of expression. On the other hand, even with the best of ideas, if the
essay has poor structure then it will simply be a complicated mess of language.
The good structure is one that fulfills the purpose
of the essay, that is to express and to achieve that focus of idea. As stated before,
the structure of the essay is not merely a structure of words but also the
structure of ideas which shows the development and evolution of that idea. Therefore
we can say that the good structure must develop and evolve that idea, that is
to explore it fully as required by the essay, and of course follow the logical
principles.
With that in mind, we can now start exploring the
structure of the essay. All essays must have a starting point, that is what
causes us or motivates us to write the essay in the first place. This starting
point may be wholly new or a continuation of a previous essay, it may be an
interesting observation or perhaps a lingering question. This is what some may
consider to be the background of the essay or the introduction of the essay.
Once we have introduced the starting point of the
essay, we may move towards the purpose of the essay, that is what do we wish to
do with the starting point of the essay. If it is a question, perhaps we wish
to answer it to the best of our capabilities in the essay, if it’s an
observation perhaps we wish to analyse it from a certain perspective. Perhaps
we may also wish to prove a statement or deduce that statement with logical
argumentation. Whatever the purpose, it is what will direct the essay and
creates the initial boundaries, so that the essay does not become a manuscript
but explores all things within that boundary sufficiently and necessarily.
After establishing the starting point and the
purpose of the essay, we can move into the argumentation. There are two types
of argumentation, first is the supporting arguments, and second is the main
argument. The supporting argument is similar to the literature study or basic
theory in scientific research, it is the arguments which support the validity
of the main argument or clarifies it or provides necessary details. Just like
in a scientific journal, in my style of essays the supporting argument goes
before the main argument, due to reasons which shall be explained later.
In my view, there are several types of supporting
arguments which have different functions. There is the explanatory argument, the
justificative argument, the assumptive argument, and the analytical argument. The
explanatory argument is a supporting argument which explains further the topic
of the essay. This is needed when the main idea of the essay is unfamiliar to
both the author or the readers, or it requires a longer explanation than the
starting point to understand it fully.
It is true that the starting point has provided
general information on the topic of discussion in the essay. However the
starting point is supposed to be brief, and simply provide a very general and
rough outline on the problem. For many topics this is sufficient, but in more
complicated topics or if I so desire, a brief introduction may not be enough. That
is where the supporting argument is needed to orient the author and the readers
further into the topic, to gain a full understanding of that topic before
moving on to the main argumentation.
An explanatory argument may also provide other
information, not necessarily describing the starting point, rather information
that needs to be understood first before moving on to the analysis of the
starting point. This may be concepts from previous essays, concepts borrowed
from other authors, or any information that is needed to be understood first
before we can understand the main topic.
While we are describing a topic more clearly and
more fully in the explanatory argument, it is important to remember that we are
not analyzing anything in it. What it means that we are simply describing the
topic in further detail, without breaking apart those details analytically. As
the purpose of the explanatory argument is simply to make clearer the topic and
not dissect it. In other words, the explanatory argument is only descriptive,
not analytical.
The justificative argument is an argument which
provides additional justification to the main argument. Some facts or
information, if inserted into the essay may strengthen the main argument and
make it more credible or increases the probability of truth. One may compare
the justificative argument to the premises in a deductive argument, though it
is more like the premises which supports the premises in that argument. That is
the role of the justificative argument, to support the truth of the main
argument. This is also what most people think of when they think of a
supporting argument.
Some justifications are stronger than others. A
justificative argument may only be providing additional facts that only give
some supporting evidence to the argument. It means that even without the
supporting argument, the main argument can still stand, this applies for
empirical facts inserted in a rationalist essay. In other more deductive
essays, such as philosophical essays, a justificative argument may be
completely necessary for the truth of the main argument. As deductive arguments
require the truth of their premises and not only the validity of the argument. Justificative
arguments provide the truth of those premises, which more often than not has
been done in previous essays, as such is merely a summary of the previous
essays.
The assumptive argument provides what assumptions do
we use in judging or analyzing a topic. This is common in essays which do not
demand as much deductive power and may be more of a commentary. The assumptions
here are similar in function to the justifications in a justificative argument,
the difference being since they are assumptions, their truths are not
necessarily guaranteed. Moreover, the truth of this argument must not be
guaranteed to be considered an assumptive argument, if it becomes guaranteed,
it may be a justificative or an analytical argument.
The source of these assumptions in my case are
generally my own views and perspectives on certain topics. These views may or
may not be justified objectively, and while sometimes it has some philosophical
grounds, those philosophical grounds have not been codified. This subjectivity
is actually what is wanted from essays involving it, as it is simply my
opinions which I wish to express on it. I do not need these opinions to be
wholly true, I simply wish to articulate them logically and provide a logical
structure to them. However it is true that sometimes assumptive arguments may
still be very strong logically and may rival essays with actual justificative arguments.
The final type of argument, the analytical argument,
provides an analytical model to analyse the topic of the essay. The reason this
is important is in a topic or problem, there are often various perspectives to
analyse it. Not all perspectives fit the purpose of the essay, as such we need
to choose a certain analytical model that suits the purpose of the essay. Because
of that, the analytical argument has more of an informative purpose, it informs
the readers and orients the author that that specific model will be used, while
the actual usage of that model will be on the main argument.
An analytical model is always derived from
philosophical essays and deductions, as such it is more often than not found in
the more deductive essays. The reasoning is an analytical model is comparable
to a law of reality, which means we are trying to explain a topic in simpler
terms, that is as the legal mechanics of reality. By that reason, only a
philosophical fact can truly describe a law of reality which becomes the basis
of the analytical model. If a model is “assumptive”, then it becomes an
assumptive argument immediately, and not an analytical argument.
After we have written sufficient supporting
arguments, then we may move on to the main argumentation, where the starting
point is analysed to obtain the purpose
of the essay. Sometimes there are no supporting arguments used, though
this is rare, in which case the topic is analysed plainly and the conclusion of
the argument is immediately achieved. For all other essays, the main argument
will involve some combining with the supporting arguments to achieve the
purpose of the essay.
A main argument commonly has three properties, that
is deductive, analytic, and synthetic. Some essays may lack one property, as I
will explain further, however most essays I write will contain those three
properties at once. The deductive property means that the main argument is a
deductive argument, that it deduces a conclusion from available premises to
fulfill the purpose of the essay. However, it is important to note that the
deductive property does not guarantee a true deductive argument in logic.
In philosophical essays, yes the deductive property
of the main argument will be truly deductive, that is producing conclusions
which are guaranteed to be true. However, general essays will sometimes produce
conclusions which are not guaranteed to be true, however they are probably
true. In that case, they are similar to inductive arguments, the reason I
classify them as deductive arguments is because of my own perspective on the
deductive-inductive distinction.
While inductive arguments are generally defined as
arguments which do not produce guaranteed to be true arguments, that is only if
the statements are worded as absolutes. If the statements are written as
probabilities, then the existence of that probability is a guaranteed truth by
the truth of the premises. Therefore, I consider it appropriate to classify all
of my essays to contain deductive main arguments, some are just more deductive
than the others. The complete reason shall be explained in another essay.
The second property is analytic, meaning a main
argument analyses or breaks apart a topic or idea into simpler parts or terms
in order to fulfill the purpose of the essay. For all essays, this property is
a must and will always appear. The reason is that all topics always have
underlying meanings and nuances that must be exposed fully so that we can argue
from it well enough. How the topic is analysed depends on the purpose of the
essay and what analytical model is used, as written in the supporting argument.
The third property is synthetic, meaning a main
argument synthesizes the main topic, which has been analysed, with itself to
create a deduction or with the analytical model or previous assumptions and
other facts and information to produce a more complete description on the
specific reality. Synthesis of course means to combine, to join together, to
make one from several things, as opposed to analysis. Along with the analytic
property, the synthetic property will always appear in an essay.
In fact, the analytic and synthetic property will
always go together, as they are two sides of the same process, that is
achieving a new or different understanding regarding topic. It is impossible
for an essay to be analytic but not synthetic, as after an analysis there will
always be a synthesis. When we analyse, we only simplify the topic into simpler
terms, however that is not enough. The simplified topic must be reintegrated
with the context of the essay and the purpose of the essay. That integration is
synthesis, and so we synthesize the isolated topic with the fuller reality of
our purpose and the external world, which is why synthesis will always appear.
In general, most if not all essays will involve all
three properties of the main argument, meaning all of my essays are deductive,
analytic, and synthetic at the same time. However, the deductive part may not
always be explicit, some essays will be more implicit in their deduction. This
is true for essays which seek only to expose and not to prove something or
answer a philosophical question. Such exposition is implicitly deductive as it
involves two premises of “if I experience X, X happened” and “I experience X”,
which is deduced into “Therefore X happened.” However it is not explicitly
deductive, what this means fully will be explained later on and in another
essay.
The closing part of the essay is the conclusion of
the essay. The conclusion is brief and simple, it summarizes the fulfillment of
the purpose of the essay, and if required summarizes the main argument and also
supporting arguments as necessary. The form of the conclusion depends on the
specific purpose of the essay, it might be a deduction, or an answer to the
question, or the summary of the analysis, or something else as every essay is unique.
The conclusion is not the absolute last part of the
essay however, as there will be additional remarks which will truly end the
essay. These remarks may be special notes on some contents of the essay as
needed, or more commonly and as a must, the future plans of relevant ideas
after the resolution of that specific idea. In my case, this is usually plans
and ideas for new essays, as a continuation or further development after that
specific idea. However not all essays may have that continuation, and the ideas
may simply be rhetorical or a far plan in the future.
Once the structure is done, and the essay is done,
we move on to other ideas and the cycle begin anew. We can see that the
structure of the essay reflects the internal structure of the idea. The idea
begins as an interesting thought or observation, which is then developed into a
purposeful discourse, with additional information, analysis and synthesis, until
it is fully developed and understood in connection with the wider reality. The
idea which was at first limited, had become deeper and wider in its scope, it
has been created. Just as we create language in the essay, through it we too
create the idea from the simple into the complex, from the subjective into the
objective, from what was a limited perspective into a more complete and
holistic one.
This structure generally applies to all essays,
however as the essay is flexible, not all essays have specifically the same
structure. The only similarity between all essays are that there is a starting
point, there is an argument, and there is a conclusion or a closing. The
details as explained in this essay applies in general, but some essays may
differ it in some of the details. This is because the structure of the essay is
to fulfill the purpose of the essay, as such essays with different purposes
must have their structures adapted to those purposes. For that reason I will
now explain how my three types of essays affect their structures and content,
starting with the philosophical essay.
Philosophical
Essay
The philosophical essay is a type of essay with the
primary purpose of developing my personal system of philosophy from the
beginning until its absolute completion, if such thing is possible. As such, a
philosophical essay represent an entire philosophical deduction or observation.
With that, the philosophical essay requires the same deductive power and
logical rigor as the actual philosophical argument it is representing. This
will affect the structure of the essay so that it fulfills the purpose of
building philosophy.
The general contents of the essay which includes the
starting points and the conclusion of the essay will be purely new and
original. External sources are used only as an additional reference or
criticism of those ideas, meaning they are mentioned once so they are never
mentioned again. The reason why starting points would be new and original is
because we are trying to build an entirely new philosophical system, not
adapting from anything else. As such my essays of philosophy will be original
and different from everything else that has been written.
There are exceptions though, these exceptions are
the first philosophical essays, by first I mean the very beginning. If I wish
to create a new system of philosophy, I must justify why it is needed in the
first place, to achieve that I must prove that the extant systems of philosophy
are insufficient in achieving its purpose or flawed in various ways. Therefore
early philosophical essays will be to criticize the old order and topple it,
and so the starting points will be necessarily “unoriginal”, as well as the
contents. After the old order is sufficiently criticized however, the essays
actually building the new system will be purely new and original.
Another feature of the starting point is being
non-empirical or rationalist. This is because we are not creating a scientific
report or an essay on scientific problems, that would certainly be empirical. We
are instead creating a philosophical essay which discusses non-empirical
problems, that is philosophy. Some may debate that philosophy is actually
empirical and just an extension of the natural sciences, such as those of the
analytic school, but I am not an analytic philosopher, and I hold that
philosophy is inherently rationalist.
For a brief explanation as to why, philosophy is a
unique study that it discusses the foundations of reality. The foundations of
reality can not be described by only one part of consciousness, instead it can
only be described fully with the fullest usage of the conscious being. Empiricism
and the natural sciences derives its knowledge only from the senses, primarily
sight, therefore it is insufficient to describe the full foundation of reality,
in fact the senses can not be used at all to do this. Which is why philosophy
is rationalist and not empiricist, the full explanation shall be given in
another essay.
For the argument, the philosophical essay has the
most deductive power and logical rigor, as it lacks any form of assumption and
all truths in the philosophical essay are accountable and can be justified. This
is logical as the idea it represents, the new philosophical system, must have
that logical rigor and justifiability. What this all means is the philosophical
essay will produce the strongest truth, in fact the undeniable truth, with no
probability of formal or content error, only linguistic error. It will also be
the strongest expression of ideas, as it is based upon guaranteed truths, and
not mere biases or assumptions.
The general approach of the philosophical essay is
bottom-up, as it begins with the absolute foundations and builds from there the
finer details of reality, or to be exact the finer details of said foundation.
This corresponds with the deductive nature, as it is said that deduction means
to apply universal rules to specific cases. Here we observe most foundational
laws, and extract them and apply them to more specific cases and form universal
laws, until we obtain a complete system of philosophy.
We have discussed the individual essays, however
they are not the final step in the system of philosophy. As stated in the
beginning, the essay is a preparation for the manuscript, and this is primarily
true for the philosophical essay. One essay may represent a single
philosophical deduction, argument, or idea, however what I am constructing is
not a single argument rather a system of arguments. Writing masses of texts may
display the scope of the system, but does not describe the essence of it, the
relationship of the arguments.
As such, a philosophical manuscript, or book, shall
become the representation of that system. It is the collection of every essay
in philosophy I have written, or if necessary categorized according to certain
topics. The manuscript is akin to a piece of jewelry made from various
beautiful stones and the finest of gold. A single essay is akin to the
individual stones, each gram of gold, and every component of that jewelry, they
are enjoyable themselves, but they are most useful when constructed fully. The
essays are the components of the manuscript, and the manuscript is the sum of
all the parts.
Of course, as in the system all ideas are connected,
this connection must already be shown in the essay. As an essay may be
justified another essay and justify another essay, then there must be a method
to refer directly to that essay. That method is to create a network of
hyperlinks and references within all essays, which connect to each other as
required. The specific usage of this network shall be explained further in this
essay.
In a more relevant context, this category of essays
will be the most worked on category of essays as it is indeed part of the
meaning of my life. In my blog, the word “essay” will most of the time mean my
philosophical essays. As it is not only a pastime, it is also a duty, a task,
and a responsibility which I must fulfill in my life. And so it is the primary
type of essay to be written and published in my blog.
Philosophy does not only deal with the foundations
of reality, it must also be connected to the wider natural sciences and even
further social sciences, and so create that bridge between the foundations and
the structures above, so we may form a truly comprehensive description of
reality. However my philosophical essays will not be forming that bridge, as my
current duty for now is to establish the foundations fully. As only when that
foundation is complete, can the bridge be built. Instead the role of bridging
belongs to another category of essays, that is the general essay.
General Essay
The general essay, as the name suggests, is a very
general type of essay. It is the truest definition of an essay, an expression
of the author’s opinion on a general topic. Since this is primarily about my
essays, then the general essay is specifically my opinion and commentary on a
topic which I am interested in or I feel is necessary to comment on. It is
opposite to the philosophical essay, which is serious and logically rigorous,
the general essay is more lighthearted and not as rigorous, but retains its
rationality and criticality.
Despite the so called lightheartedness, there are
two types of general essays, which are not that too different. The first type
is the philosophical general essay, and the second type is the non-philosophical
general essay. Their differences lie in the supporting arguments used, but
retain similarity in problems of starting points and conclusions. The first
type is more similar to the description in the end of the philosophical essay
section previously, while the second type is the genuine general essay.
For the starting point, contrary to the
philosophical essay, the general essay is neither new, original, or non
empirical. The reason is contained in the essence of the general essay. It
discusses topics which have already existed, in my perspective, instead of
creating new topics from scratch. As such they are derived from existent
sources, or from extant experiences, which are also empirical. The subject
matter of the essay has already existed previously, be it primary source or
secondary source, we are only reviewing it and giving it a new perspective.
In the supporting argument, this is where the two
types diverge. The philosophical general essay is an essay that specifically
applies philosophical concepts as obtained in my essays to real life situations
and topics. The non philosophical general essay, does not apply philosophical
concepts, and is instead based upon my prior biases, perspectives, and
assumptions on that topic.
The supporting argument of the philosophical general
essay is then an analytical model or just any philosophical concept from my
essays, which will then be used to analyse and evaluate or judge a certain
topic. It is after all, the bridge between pure philosophy and the actual
world, and so philosophical concepts must be used to analyse the topic, which
has been prepared previously in the philosophical essay.
On the other hand, the non philosophical general
essay, or the true general essay, uses assumptions for its supporting argument.
Specifically my assumptions and not an external assumption. This is only
because I have not established that particular assumption as a philosophical
fact, if it is a fact of philosophy it would immediately be a philosophical
general essay. It means that the distinction is used only to differentiate
between unjustified belief and justified belief.
The consequence of the empirical and assumptive
nature of the general essay is of course the deductive power and the logical
rigor of the general essay. Both types have weaknesses on the empirical side of
the essay. As compared with a rationalist fact, an empirical information always
has a certain level of doubt to it. This means that the empirical reporting or
recalling in any general essay will always have a certain probability of error,
usually because of my faulty observation or faulty memory. The problem becomes
graver though in a true general essay.
The philosophical general essay is handicapped only
in the empirical side of it, that is the starting point. The supporting
argument is still certain as it is derived from philosophical essays. The true
general essay is uncertain in both the empirical side, and the supporting
arguments as it is based upon unjustified or poorly justified assumptions. Regardless
of how “good” these assumptions are, without proper philosophical grounds, they
have high uncertainty and are much more prone to error.
This handicap on the true general essay is
acceptable as the goal of the true general essay is never to establish an absolute
truth on a topic. The primary goal is only to express my opinions and thoughts,
or biases to be exact, on a certain topic. However it does not remove the
rational element of the essay. By that I mean the logical relationship between
the assumption and the topic, this part still must be established clearly to
fulfill the purpose of expression.
Furthermore, the empirical flaw of the general
essays are not caused by an intent on being flawed, rather the natural
incompetence, or limits, of the human being and also my personal incompetence,
or limits, in these issues. The assumption of course, is never meant to be
justified, and it is never meant to be permanent, it is the result of my
temporary judgement on certain topics, to be hold and revised continuously
until I obtain a permanent justified belief, obtained through philosophy.
As a result of these so called flaws, the general
essay may not be as perfect in terms of deductive power and logical rigor as
the philosophical essay, because it does not need to be. It has its value in
expressing myself and my temporary opinions on various subjects that I have to
comment at that time, before it is no longer relevant. Its other value is of
course in bridging philosophy with empirical issues, which I feel must be done
quickly before it is no longer relevant. Moreover, for philosophical general
essays, it is probably done in a time when my skills in empirical reporting has
improved significantly with higher standards based in philosophy.
The role of the general essay in my entire plan of
essays is much less and lighter than the philosophical essay, especially in
this current time frame. While the philosophical essay is practically my work,
the general essay is more of recreational, to have fun a bit in the world of essays,
in case I ever get tired of philosophical essays. In the far future though, the
general essay may be more integrated with the philosophical essay, and this is
where the essay system begins.
As most general essays will be partly recreational
and expressive instead of professional and assertive, they are not done with
any major purpose of creating a system. The most we will get is a connection
between a general essay and a philosophical essay which justifies it. However
in the far future this may change and general essays may be assembled in a
system similar to the philosophical essay. For now, general essays will simply
be one shots in the essay world, for single time consumption, not as part of
any major system.
The range of topics of general essays are wide, but
still finite. The limits are of course the human mind, and aside that, the
philosophical limit and a second personal limit. If the topic is in relation to
forming the new philosophical system, then it’s not a general essay. However,
if the topic relates to my personal life too much, to the point that it may be
sensitive to others or offensive to others, it is no longer a general essay,
rather the next category of essays, the personal essay.
Personal Essay
As the name suggests, the personal essay is an essay
which discusses topics unique to myself, that is about my personal life, my
personal identity, and my personal history. With that, the personal essay is
the most unique category and most different from the philosophical or general
essay. The general purpose is still that of the essay, that is my opinion on
certain topics, in this case that topic is myself.
With that, the limits of the topic of this essay is
very specific and strict, that is myself. What constitutes as myself are topics
which are of my identity and personal experience. To be clearer, if I
experience an event, that experience may be the topic of a general essay or a
personal essay. It is general if I discuss the social and impersonal aspects of
that experience, it is personal if I discuss the personal aspect, that is how I
feel, how I think, and how I am affected by that experience.
Unlike the general essay and the philosophical essay
which can be enjoyed alone to an extent, the personal essay is most useful when
it is all done and has been compiled as a full manuscript or book, that is an
autobiography. Which means I will begin from the final purpose of the personal
essay. The final purpose is to explain my full being which is my personal
history, and how various events of my life affected the evolution of my being
until the final form. That final form is of course the form of the far future,
once I am finished in life.
As the personal essay is primarily concerned with
explaining who and what I am, it is easy to say that a commonly major feature
of an essay will be absent, that is the deduction. Instead my personal essays
will be dominated by exposition, analysis, and synthesis of the various events
of my life. There may be elements of my personal essays which seems
“deductive”, that is if I am establishing certain causal relationships between
elements of my life, then I must deduce that a certain event caused a part of
my identity.
It is certainly possible that any causal analysis of
my life will be based upon psychological assumptions. This is fine as my
priority is of course exposing the memories as much as I can, the analysis can
be done later. If possible, I may use philosophical concepts to analyse my
self, though this is after I have reached a rather advanced stage in my philosophical
system. Before that happens, the relationships will be on basis of assumption.
At this point, one may wonder, what is the value of
an essay with such low quality of logical rigor and the source of knowledge
being rather unreliable? First of all, I do not intend to publish my personal
essays, not before the autobiography, which will compile all the personal
essays. Then one may ask, what is the purpose of me writing of an entire
category which will not be published? The reason is I only wish to express and
share of my experiences, one may say that this section is also an entirely
personal section. Furthermore, not all essays will be kept private, only those
I consider to be sensitive, those which I judge to be safe for public view, I
will publish.
The personal essays will commonly be narrative, as
it narrates my life on a semi chronological basis. Semi, as I do not remember
the precise time of all the events of my life, only the general time frames are
remembered. It is also much more casual than the general or philosophical
essays, but it is not to be mistaken as an emotional outpouring or as a non
rational text. It is casual only to the extent of not violating the purpose of
the personal essay.
The purpose as I have stated, is the expression of
myself and also the complete description of my being, including all causal
relationships between events and my being. Then to fulfill that, a standard of
rationality and logical rigor must be maintained to make clear expression and
to expose the causal relationships of the self. As such the personal essay, no
matter how personal it is, remains a rational and logical essay which must be
written according to the standards of logic and rationality.
The personal essays will form an internal system, as
perhaps certain memories will relate to other memories, or be caused by other
previous events. It will be similar to the internal system of philosophical
essays, with references and hyperlinks connecting various essays as required. This
is to display the full causal relationships within my being. In the end, a
single autobiography will be written, summarizing all personal essays, which
will paint the full description of my being, and also the complete
relationships between various elements of my being.
With that I have explained sufficiently on the three
categories of my essays, that is the philosophical essay, the general essay,
and the personal essay, which all have a connection to my purpose in life. I
have explained a bit of my future plans for the essays, but I have not
explained them thoroughly enough. For that reason I will lay out as much as
possible my final plans and hopes for the collection of all of my essays, for
your information and for my goals.
Final Plan
I have said that I wish for a manuscript in the end,
this is true and as such I will recall that part. Before that maybe we can
clear some terminology, by manuscript I mean the form of writing which is long
and discusses various ideas united under a single topic. A manuscript can
indeed be a book, but for me a book refers to the physical shape of text on
paper, or perhaps a digital compiled text which is long enough. Which is why I
will refer to it as manuscript and not book.
As mentioned, the categories which will definitely
have a manuscript or more are the philosophical essays and the personal essays.
The general essays may have a manuscript but it is uncertain. For the personal
essays, it is guaranteed that only a single manuscript will be written, that is
the autobiography. For philosophical essays, there may be a single lengthy
manuscript which provides an absolute theory of everything which unites all
branches of philosophy into one theory. There may also be several more manuscripts
which discusses each of those branches more deeply.
For the general essays, the reason I am not certain
with it is because of the nature of the general essay. True general essays, are
not that worthy of being a manuscript, unless I developed my empirical skills,
while philosophical general essays are far beyond and a third priority still. As
such, if it is possible, I may create several manuscripts, in collaboration
with others hopefully, on several topics in integration with philosophy. The specific
nature of this integration, I will explain in another essay.
Aside from the manuscripts, I will certainly release
a compilation of all of my essays to the general public. This may however be
somewhat unnecessary as my blog exists. Regardless I still wish to release that
compilation so that it is more accessible. A compilation of every essay I have
written, may be uploaded online through some website service or something
similar. For a paper version, which may or may not happen considering
environmental conservation, will most likely only compile the “best” of my
essays, however that criterion is judged.
The collections will of course be divided into each
category of my essay. The collection of the personal essay will be particularly
new to the public as I have planned not to publish any personal essays or only
publish the most insensitive of it, which may or may not exist before the
autobiography is published. For the rest, I am certain some people will already
be familiar with those essays.
Those are the furthest goals, or the final fruition
of the plan, before writing manuscripts I want an internal system within my
essays. If you read the Indonesian version of this essay in my other blog, I
wrote that I desire a system incorporating all of my essays, this will probably
be impossible in actuality. Instead I will focus on the internal system and
interaction of each category of essay with each other and if possible, with the
outside world.
The first priority is the system of the
philosophical essays, this has been explained in its section, and as such I do
not see any need to explain it deeper. It is a certainty that all essays of
philosophy will be connected to each other and there will be no isolated
groups. This is due to the unity of the philosophical system, where all ideas
or arguments are connected, and mutually justifies each other.
The second priority is the system of the personal
essays, this has been explained as well, as such I will also recall it briefly.
Unlike the philosophical essays, it is possible that there may be some isolated
groups of essays, though I hope that does not happen. A system of personal
essays is still necessary as it represents my entire being, which is also a
united system where each part connects to each other and causes or is affected
by each other.
For general essays, I expect that for true genuine
essays there will be practically no interaction with other essays. Any sort of
system in the general essays will be seen in the far future, when I have
focused on the philosophical general essay. Instead of a system with itself, I
believe that it would interact more with philosophical essays, as philosophical
general essays borrow concepts from them. It may also interact with the outside
world, concerning its empirical nature.
While seemingly far fetched, I consider it possible
that there will be an interaction between personal essays and philosophical
essays, as I may use some philosophical concepts to explain some parts of my
identity. The least likely interactions are of course with general essays,
though there is still a chance if the topic happens to coincide and are
relevant to be connected.
That is the theory of the “system”, but how will it
actually be practiced? The practice or mechanics of it has been mentioned
briefly, that is through an intricate system of reference work, hyperlinks to
each essay, and inline citations. The hyperlink will be visible on various
sentences or remarks which are based upon those previous essays and will direct
us to that specific essay if we click it. For the reference work, which
includes inline citations, it is a bit more complicated.
As I plan out any of my essays, I will plan out all
of the sources as necessary and locate their digital locations. After listing
them, as I write out the essay it will then be put into the bibliography system
in Word and then I will spread citations as necessary for each remark based
upon another essay. This method of course works for external sources as well,
and is no different with referencing one of my essays.
One may ask, in what medium will the essays be
considering I will publish them only in the end? The answer is, my blog, and so
I will explain the mechanics in my blog as well. Every essay I make, that is
the philosophical and general essays, will be uploaded in my blog. As the blog
is a website, I can certainly refer to these essays as a web page in a website
when entering in the sources in Word, especially with APA style. As such, the
bibliography in my essays will refer to my personal essays as web pages, which
they actually are.
The bibliography system extends not only to
inter-essay interactions but also between the manuscripts and the essays. As
the manuscripts are based upon essays, then many information will have their
justification in the essay, and so must refer back to them to illustrate the
relationship. In this case, as the essays already have a published version, the
bibliography may instead refer to that published version instead of the
website.
Finally I shall explain how my essays interact with
external sources and the language in which I will write. Some of my essays may
criticize external sources or be inspired by it, and so must refer to them as a
starting point or supporting argument in my essays. The way to refer them is of
course standard and I just follow the established guidelines. I will write my
essays in two languages, that is Indonesian and English. English to communicate
with the international community, and Indonesian to communicate with my own
people in Indonesia.
The contents of the two essays will generally be the
same in the core contents, though the expression will certainly differ. If you
are bilingual in both languages, and have read my Indonesian version of this
essay, you will see there are several differences, in the future that will not
happen. And so there for each Indonesian or English essay, there is always a
pairing essay in the other language. As translations do take time, I do not
plan to write in any other language, those who wish to translate themselves,
translate away.
Moving to much shorter term goals, I already have a
general image on my first essays. This first essay is already part of the goal,
that is to establish fully my writing styles, justifications for certain acts,
and other things related to my writing. And so my first essays will most likely
be about my use of external sources, my steps of writing, and a further on my
views on logical arguments and how to use them. I also seek to fully prepare
the philosophical essays, as before I can begin with my actual system, I must
clear out the foundations and establish the first stones.
After the essays on writing, or still the essays on “essays”,
the first philosophical essays will begin. It may take turns with some general
essays, as I have accumulated a large amount of ideas for these general essays.
The first philosophical essays will be criticisms of modern society as I see
it, criticism of various modern philosophical schools, and also my views on
philosophy itself, that is what it is, the roles, the implications and all
that. Once those are done I can begin with my philosophical system.
I also plan to write my personal essays along that,
though maybe not as often as philosophical essays, but it is still a priority,
more so than the general essays. However as none of you, except for certain
people, will read them, it will not affect the common readers of my essays that
much, except in the form of long periods of inactivity due to me writing them.
With that, I believe my final plans on the essays
have been well laid down and this essay is nearing its end. As I am still a
High School student at the time of writing this, it will be a struggle to
juggle everything around. However I will still do my best in writing my essays,
for my purpose and also for the satisfaction of any potential readers. If you
examine this essay and the supposed standards of an essay written here, it is
clear that this essay does not fully follow it. Of course as a first essay,
there will be mistakes around, but it will be resolved further in future essays.
With that, I believe I can begin to close this essay.
Closing
With all I have written, I have fully established
the essay as a means to express my thoughts on various topics in this reality. The
essay is highly effective in tackling individual arguments as it focuses fully
on that argument, thus focusing on perfection and quality of the argument. Its
structure helps fulfill that by organizing the argument into a clear
development, which is represented through the structure of language, but in
truth represents the development of the argument.
As the essay is defined by its form, I can use the
essay for various topics, which I have classified into three categories, the
philosophical essay, the general essay, and the personal essay. Of course for
others the limits may even be wider, and this categorization is only for my
purpose. As stated, the essay is not the end, instead it is the preparation for
the final manuscript, which summarizes fully on the whole of my philosophical
or personal systems, or as a full critique on various problems.
With the resolution of this essay, it marks the beginning of my world of essays and my journey in this task. For the nearest goal, I hope to write an essay on my justifications for how I will use citations and references to external sources. After that, I wish to write an essay on my personal steps of writing as of now, considering I have no editors or partners yet. With that, I believe there is no more need to explain further, and what is left for me is to execute my plans.
