The topic of 'All You Need is Love' may be a good one — Jack Cummins

Let thesis = "All you need is love"

Let your claim = I argue that all you need is love

In a couple of thousand words, persuade me.

I do agree with you really as a clear independent position may require thesis. . The only problem is many on this forum have studied philosophy at postgraduate level and beyond. Also, there are many who are published writers, so the standard may be extremely high. I have noticed in the last year, that the forum has become more academic. That is good in many respects as opposed to 'armchair philosophy'. The only danger is that it may become elitist.

I have noticed in the last year, that the forum has become more academic...............................The only danger is that it may become elitist. — Jack Cummins

This gives a possible thesis: "The Academic elitist world-view is bad for society"

Actually, it may be hard to defend the view that ' All you need is Love' in 2000 words. I am already in dialogue with a friend, or ex- friend about it. The reason why I add'ex-friend' is because in lockdown he decided that he is in ceasefire from people. He has self-diagnosed himself with autism. He sees all forms of empathy and kindness as false and about 'people pleasing'. His own focus is on getting what he wants out of the system.

This Is fairly Nietzschean, but it may be hard to challenge. The 'social contract' may be a possible source of argument, but it may not be holding up in a time of societal fragmentation

Yes, a critique of academic elitism may be worth exploring. I am not sure whether I feel up to it, but you never know and, maybe, someone will.

it may be hard to defend the view that ' All you need is Love' in 2000 words. — Jack Cummins

You have a max of 5,000 words. Stop looking for excuses!
Write as if you were starting a thread, think of a head-bangin' OP, expand and chill out :pray: :flower:
Remember, this is not a competition. There will be a wide spectrum of writers doing their own thing. Within the guidelines. Think and feel your way through...it's all a story...pick another song.

Actually, it may be hard to defend the view that ' All you need is Love' in 2000 words — Jack Cummins

Perhaps that's what would make it a good thesis for a philosophy essay.

The Thread allows 5,000 words, but the Seán Radcliffe essay that won him the 2023 Irish Young Philosopher Awards Grand Prize and Philosopher of Our Time Award was only about 1,500 words.

A philosophy essay is a dialogue between the author and the reader, and there may not be a correct or definitive answer, as long as the essay is well-argued within a logical structure.

The philosophy essay wants your personal opinion, a little bit of evidence for your opinion, a reason or two why this evidence is relevant, one or two obvious counter-arguments and a reason or two why you rebut the counter-arguments.

Perhaps "academic" just means a well-argued claim within a logical structure.

the Seán Radcliffe essay that won him the 2023 Irish Young Philosopher Awards Grand Prize and Philosopher of Our Time Award was only about 1,500 words. — RussellA

Yes. To read again, for inspiration:
Plato’s Cave & Social Media
Seán Radcliffe asks, has Plato’s Allegory of the Cave been warning us of social media for 2,400 years?
https://philosophynow.org/issues/165/Platos_Cave_and_Social_Media

As having difficulty choosing a topic, I do wonder if having a theme (or several) would have made the activity seem less daunting. At one point, I remember that I'magination' was suggested but I think it was dismissed. Anyone could choose to use it as a prompt although it may be seen as unimaginive to do so. — Jack Cummins

I'm good with spinning out some possible topics for help here in this thread insofar that we all are thinking together.

Mostly, though, I want people who are interested in the idea to participate; insofar that the "rules" enhance participation then thems the rules we should adopt.

In terms of choosing a topic: I think the format of "ask a question, answer a question" is good.

In terms of topics -- well, I already said I think it's a good idea to throw out topics. So say what topics you want! :D

"What is thinking worth in our political era?", "Why are we tempted to say that mathematics are universal?", "What are the reasons, if there are any, for our belief that Shakespeare is good?"

But we can still brainstorm topics here

It's not yet June ;)

And 500 words is a small ask. So treat this exercise as a small topic.

"Why are we tempted to say that mathematics are universal?" — Moliere

Another useful source here

Question = "Why are we tempted to say that mathematics are universal?"

Why not do a Boris Johnson and write 500 words defending one's claim that "I argue that mathematics is not universal" and then another 500 words defending one's claim that "I argue that mathematics is universal".

From Reuters, London

Boris Johnson, who campaigned prominently for Britain to leave the European Union ahead of a June referendum, argued in favour of remaining in the bloc in an unpublished newspaper column two days before backing Brexit, according to a newspaper report.

As Sun Tzu wrote:

If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.

And 500 words is a small ask. — Moliere

Are you sure about that? :chin:

I'm reminded of the 'flash fiction' or micro fiction of the short story competition.
A few from Dec 2022:
Sundae, Bloody Sundae by @Baden
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/13727/sundae-bloody-sundae-by-baden/p1
In the Wake of the Moriscos by @Jamal
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/13718/in-the-wake-of-the-moriscos-by-jamal/p1

I think can be harder to be concise. As well as knowing what you want to write, it requires skill and discipline to keep things simple, creative and enjoyable.

In philosophy writing, I think it is difficult to make substantial points in 500 words.
That means that you need to strip ideas down to the basics. I would say the meat of the matter but isn't it more the bones?

It is a great exercise in reading a philosopher's text. To reach the salient points. To find the Premises and Conclusions. To know and understand the Views and Arguments. But then to focus on a single issue and cover that well, giving it full attention. No need to say everything.

That is one way - the more academic. Basically coming to a conclusion as to whether you agree/disagree and explaining why.

Less formally, it might be a simple letter, an exchange, letting someone know what your philosophy is.
Perhaps a dialogue with a friend. Perhaps more practical. Or mythical. A wisdom piece. A puzzle.
You can state your position and justification about...anything!

I found this:
https://lessfoolish.substack.com/p/500-word-philosophy
and a linked essay example:
Life Philosophy

Be that Philosophy Phlasher. Hell, yeah! :fire: :cool: :monkey:

Why not do a Boris Johnson and write 500 words defending one's claim that "I argue that mathematics is not universal" and then another 500 words defending one's claim that "I argue that mathematics is universal". — RussellA

I like the idea of an essay in two halves. or even 4 quarters and a bit.
Is it true that 'All you need is love'?

First half - the academic structure style and content.
Second half - the less formal.

Which is the most persuasive, interesting and why? Hmm...

I like the idea of an essay in two halves. or even 4 quarters and a bit. Is it true that 'All you need is love'? — Amity

Question = All you need is love?

Possible claim = I argue that all you need is love.

I agree. Perhaps at its core a philosophy essay is about making a claim and logically defending it, regardless of whether in a formal or informal style.

I personally don't agree that all you need is love, so I would be interested in being persuaded otherwise.

I personally don't agree that all you need is love, so I would be interested in being persuaded otherwise. — RussellA

I think it is a silly claim and not one I will be making!
However, this surprisingly lengthy piece about the Beatles song is fascinating:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_You_Need_Is_Love

***

Until today, I had no idea that 'flash philosophy' was a thing.
I found this: 'Cutting-edge philosophy in bite-sized pieces':

https://flashphilosophy.com/
Essays range from a 1min to a 5min read:

1. Harman’s False Dichotomy
2. Nagel’s Question-Begging Argument on the Badness of Death
3. Identity Pleas and Excuses
4. Anticipating Gettier
5. The Paradox of Personal Identity
6. Getting Gettier Wrong

7. Sight and light -

(This post was excerpted, with Audi’s permission, from his Epistemology: A Contemporary Introduction to the Theory of Knowledge. It’s an excellent example of how it is possible to make an interesting and even important philosophical point in very few words.) — Flash philosophy

8. More “Constancies” in Visual Perception
9. Determinacy and the Self

I think it is a silly claim and not one I will be making! — Amity

However, perhaps that is exactly the claim to make. If you can persuade others about a claim you think is silly, then it should be a cake walk to persuade others about a claim you think sensible.

When writing a philosophy essay, it is perhaps not essential to believe in your claim, only to logically argue for your claim.

If someone else can then make their own logical argument why your claim is silly, you can then take their argument on board and adjust your own position. An example of SpaceX's Rapid Design Iteration.

Dr Matt Williams of Jesus College Oxford made the point that he felt he always achieved high marks because he sometimes started with an outlandish claim which he argued well.

Until today, I had no idea that 'flash philosophy' was a thing. — Amity

Thanks for the link. I had never come across the concept before.

Dr Matt Williams of Jesus College Oxford made the point that he felt he always achieved high marks because he sometimes started with an outlandish claim which he argued well. — RussellA

Thank you!
Excellent video (19mins) showing the importance of structure, as in making a case to convince a 'jury'.
Important if you are a lawyer representing a client and arguing for the 'Not Guilty verdict. Or v.v.

As you say:

When writing a philosophy essay, it is perhaps not essential to believe in your claim, only to logically argue for your claim. — RussellA

At 16:05, he highlights the point that 'it doesn't matter what you think, it matters what you can prove'. So, even if you think the client is guilty, you must do your job effectively and successfully.
By making and taking a clear and logical path to the conclusion.

***

Later, it is not an 'outlandish claim' he makes, rather he presents a negative view to the claim that 'Democracy causes growth'. At 16:34, there is a differently structured argument for:
'Democracy cannot cause growth'.

Everything in this presentation is clear, concise and well explained.

***

I agree that it can be a good exercise to play devil's advocate. Arguing against a popular idea can provoke and test the opposing arguments. It can help clarify your position.

But you still haven't persuaded me to write an essay arguing that 'All you need is Love', sorry!
Why? Just because! :joke: I've been going down a 'rabbit-hole' of my own making.

Talking of which, didn't you just love his 'bunny ears' - to highlight the important words to focus on in any debate. Also, his replies to BTL questions:

I agree that several words in the questions are ambiguous. But the ones that I highlighted were the focus of each debate.

In the analogy I gave to a court trial, the words guilty/not guilty would focus debate there. Similarly, the words highlighted by bunny ears were the main focus of what everyone is and should be arguing about when responding to that question. It is absolutely fine to pick on other ambiguous terms in the question, provided that you are focused on the core debate.

[ About 'bunny ears. Don't they tend to be 'single' in English essays, rather than the American "doubles''?]

Thanks for the link. I had never come across the concept before. — RussellA

My pleasure. Enjoying the conversation but I must get on with reading...

I think can be harder to be concise. As well as knowing what you want to write, it requires skill and discipline to keep things simple, creative and enjoyable. — Amity

Yes, often some poetic, or at least lyrical, skill. I'm thinking particularly of the aphorisms of Nietzsche and Cioran here. I like that approach, but it doesn't quite fit with the idea of a philosophical essay.

I'm thinking particularly of the aphorisms of Nietzsche and Cioran here. I like that approach, but it doesn't quite fit with the idea of a philosophical essay. — Baden

Hmm. Yes. Aphorisms are clearly too short to be an essay but they still contain philosophical meaning and can be expanded on. What are the concerning issues? Why are they written at a particular time. How do we make sense of them without talking to the author? Is it all down to individual interpretation?

Why do you like the approach? That way of writing, reading, reflection?
Perhaps, that might be an interesting project. To write an essay full of aphorisms and explain? Or not.

I don't know anything about Cioran. So, turned first to TPF Search box, then Wiki:

Two threads, started by @schopenhauer1
1. 6yrs ago: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/6104/e-m-cioran-aphorism-analysis/p1
2. 2yrs ago: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/14398/whats-the-implications-of-this-e-m-cioran-quote/p1

***

Aphorisms make up a large portion of Cioran's bibliography, and some of his books, such as The Trouble with Being Born, are composed entirely of aphorisms. Speaking about this decision, Cioran said:

I only write this kind of stuff, because explaining bores me terribly. That's why I say when I've written aphorisms it's that I've sunk back into fatigue, why bother. And so, the aphorism is scorned by "serious" people, the professors look down upon it. When they read a book of aphorisms, they say, "Oh, look what this fellow said ten pages back, now he's saying the contrary. He's not serious."

Me, I can put two aphorisms that are contradictory right next to each other. Aphorisms are also momentary truths. They're not decrees. And I could tell you in nearly every case why I wrote this or that phrase, and when. It's always set in motion by an encounter, an incident, a fit of temper, but they all have a cause. It's not at all gratuitous. — Wiki - Cioran

There are contradictions, sometimes depending on mood or emotion. Physical, mental or psychological state. Context and circumstance. Some readers might fix/ate on one that appeals to their own philosophy of life, or way of thinking. They might see only what they want to see. Or those that fit with their experience. And make arguments accordingly. Cue never-ending speculations.

TPF threads are a good starting point but they can fizzle out in frustration.
I think the June event might provide a way to enlighten in a substantial way, in careful dialogue.
Are you up for it @Baden? @schopenhauer1? Go on. We need creative stimulation :cool: :wink:

I'm thinking particularly of the aphorisms of Nietzsche and Cioran here. I like that approach, but it doesn't quite fit with the idea of a philosophical essay. — Baden

A philosophy essay logically defends a claim. Nietzsche used the aphoristic style to free himself from a metaphysical search for the fundamental nature of reality. Must all philosophy essays be about the metaphysical search for the fundamental nature of reality? Discuss.

Must all philosophy essays be about the metaphysical search for the fundamental nature of reality? Discuss. — RussellA

Hey there. You keep coming up with ideas for an essay. How are you getting on with yours?

Until today, I had no idea that 'flash philosophy' was a thing.
I found this: 'Cutting-edge philosophy in bite-sized pieces':

https://flashphilosophy.com/
Essays range from a 1min to a 5min read: — Amity

@Jamal -
Your flash fiction is excellent. Do you think you could be a flash philosopher?

I hope other TPF short story writers will take part...chilling out and being imaginative.
Using different styles of engagement.

You keep coming up with ideas for an essay. How are you getting on with yours? — Amity

At the moment an actual essay is taking second place to trying to understand what a "Philosophy Essay" actually is.

I am going through various guides to "How to write a philosophy essay" and trying to tabulate what these guides have in common.

Every so often I make a post including my understanding of what a "Philosophy Essay" is in the expectation of being shot down.

At the moment an actual essay is taking second place to trying to understand what a "Philosophy Essay" actually is. — RussellA

Really? Oh dear. From all your posts, it seems you have a good enough understanding.
It is not necessary, or even desired, to write the perfect, academic essay! Unless that is what your aim is.
From the guidelines:

4) Must fall under the broad category of a philosophical essay. The Essay's Title and Topic are chosen by the author. The philosophical viewpoint can be academic or less formal. It should be systematic with an Introduction, Main Body and Conclusion. This is non-fiction. Poetic expression is allowed if it completes or supports the philosophical exploration. — Moliere

Every so often I make a post including my understanding of what a "Philosophy Essay" is in the expectation of being shot down. — RussellA

You won't be shot down. Because this is an open, free and easy environment. Practically, anything goes!
Given your 'fixation', that could easily be the topic of your essay.

Write about whatever you are interested in. What questions excite or intrigue you enough to share?
Which philosopher do you agree/disagree with and why? What attracts/repels you?

At this point, I have started reading and researching my chosen topic.
This takes time. To reflect and take notes.
I have a basic, rough outline in my head of what I want to include. I don't intend for my essay to be long!
But who knows...things change...

And I am allowing myself to be distracted. Again! :roll:

It is not necessary, or even desired, to write the perfect, academic essay! Unless that is what your aim is. — Amity

I want to know how to write the perfect, academic philosophy essay, even if it is beyond my ability.

I have the essay's title and am aiming at 2,000 words. For the rest of this month probably tabulating what should be included in a good philosophy essay and will start researching next month.

As with SpaceX's Iterative Design Process, perhaps being shot down occasionally is part of the learning process.

Because this is an open, free and easy environment — Amity

It's good to have an open environment. However, I do avoid political threads on the Forum because they generally break the spirit of what a philosophy essay should be, in that claims are often made with minimal effort in justifying them with either evidence or reasoned argument.

I have the essay's title and am aiming at 2,000 words. For the rest of this month probably tabulating what should be included in a good philosophy essay and will start researching next month. — RussellA

OK. It seems you have it all under control. Best wishes! :sparkle: :flower:

Are you up for it Baden? — Amity

I'm up for burying you in a mountain of aphorisms if you so desire.

I'm up for burying you in a mountain of aphorisms if you so desire. — Baden

:smile: Yeah, baby! Covered in ice-cream and a splashing of strawberry sauce.
"Bon appetit." :yum: :party:

I'm still trying to figure out the where the line is between philosophy and psychology.
Ice cream sounds better than either.

I'm still trying to figure out the where the line is between philosophy and psychology.
Ice cream sounds better than either. — Vera Mont

As you know, a clear distinction is found in academia.

However, the line is blurry and there is much overlap. I immediately think of Stoicism and CBT:
https://simplyputpsych.co.uk/global-psych/how-stoicism-aligns-with-cognitive-behavioural-therapy

But I guess your concern lies more in the content of whatever you are writing for this event.
How 'philosophical' is it? It depends on your view of philosophy. The focus of your interest.
Your chosen topic and the aspects that catch your imagination.

I was once accused of trying to 'psychologise' someone. I think I was questioning intentions or motivations for a belief, or text, and its implications for the self and others. Personality and behaviour.

I think I argued that these factors are as important as the concept, theory or claim being discussed.
If philosophy is about the human condition and how best to live our lives. To examine and understand underlying assumptions and prejudice. Then, it involves asking holistic questions about ourselves and interactions with people and the environment.

Philosophy writing, then.
I think it must start with a philosophical idea or concept to be explored, discussed or analysed.
And/or a particular philosopher's view and arguments. Compared to your own.
A concern re happiness or badness or busyness or an -ism/ist.
What inspires you to write?

What gets and keeps you going? Ice-cream?
So many questions, theories and experiences to be considered, huh.
So many ways to describe and share. But sometimes it all comes down to taste. Aesthetics.

Ice cream sounds better than either. — Vera Mont

You can have it all! :cool:

"The unexamined life is not worth living" - said Socrates, licking an ice-cream cone...