Do you wish to drink up the sea or shadow the steps of Plato? Do you think philosophy is best portrayed literarily rather than syllogistically?
To be able to write philosophy literarily comes with multiple difficulties. As a writer of literary philosophy, one must be adept in both philosophy and literature. Yet, one can hone their skills as both a philosopher and literary writer.
To philosophize
How could one improve at philosophy? How does one even measure what makes for a good philosopher? Well, there is no means to be a good philosopher, but one can improve at philosophy. This sounds contradictory; how can this be so?
To improve at philosophy means to become more versed in philosophy. The skill of a philosopher is the ability to extrapolate and create understandings. The only means to practice the extrapolation and creation of understandings is through study.
It is not just a matter of versing oneself in a singular tradition. Rather, to verse oneself in a myriad of traditions opens one up to what understandings can be extrapolated upon and what understandings have not yet been created.
There is no room for snobbery; there is only ignorance in assuming some traditions are valueless. Philosophy pertains to understandings with all understandings being means of understanding reality and or aspect of reality. While some understandings may have a greater correspondence to reality, all understandings tell us something about reality.
To philosophize is to investigate reality and to investigate reality is to investigate reality for all that it has to offer. Of course, the philosophical classics are worth reading up on but so is philosophy of Rastafarianism.
So to improve at philosophy one should improve their understanding. In order to improve understanding, one must come to understand. So, while one cannot be good at philosophy itself, one can be an improved philosopher with the good study of philosophy.
Writing literature
Good writers write less. As philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche wrote, “It is my ambition to say in ten sentences what others say in a whole book.”
There is a common piece of horrid advice that writers should write everyday. No, writers should read everyday. The practice of writing is reading.
One should read far more than they write as to not be clouded by their own ego. In order to know what good or bad writing is, one must observe them. One cannot measure the rank of their own words properly without being a reader.
One can only know if their words are lighting if they know what it is like to be struck. We cannot know how to strike until we’ve been struck ourselves.
Good writers write less does not just pertain to constancy of one’s writing. A good writer will slash more words than they release and discard more than they keep.
A good writer is a brutal reductionist editor. Even those who write the longest of works such as Kant, Foucault, or Dostoevsky were still skilled slashers. A good writer knows when something is said as it needs to be said.
To combine literature and philosophy
Where does one begin to combine the recommended constant philosophical reading with comparatively little writing? Anywhere really.
When adopting these methods, one will be more reflexive and less reactive in regards to their writing. They will be more careful with their words and more thoughtful with their ideas. They will be able to better realize which thoughts belong in the rubbish versus which deserve deeper investigation.
Yet, so far, has not all that has been said truly focus on writing philosophy? Where do the literary element come in? As if literature is not philosophy.
One should also read in depth all forms of what is reduced to literature. Devour poems, consume plays, fed on visual novels, eat graphic novels, feast on short stories, and so on.
By learning what others have created one can learn what can be created, therefore they can learn what philosophies have not been portrayed literarily. Whether these philosophies be of their own creation or extrapolation from other philosophers.
Conclusion
I cannot tell one what words they should write. I cannot show someone how to write like themselves. They may figure that out themselves.
All I can do is encourage study. When we truly learn about others, we can more clearly know how we are separate from them. The same is true with literary writing and philosophy. The more we investigate the literary writing and philosophy of others, the more we realize the distinctions we have from them.
Yet, if we do not take the time to know others and know thyself, we will not be realized. We will not realize what we are producing an imitation, something uninspired, a work poorly made, or just a dreadful piece.
I cannot not grant a step by step guide on how to write literary philosophy. I can only make recommendations I see as eudemonic. In a sense the title is a lie.
But in another sense, the title is genuine. As how literary philosophy is done in doing it, obviously. However, one must know the proper training in order to write literary philosophy. One does not kick a basketball to practice for baseball.
Therefore, the training regiment that I recommend in order to be able to write literary philosophy is to read voraciously, write less, and edit brutally. If you think I have offered a good regiment, follow it if you like. But I am also sure there are other regiments that also work quite well.
About the author
Anthony David Vernon is a Cuban-American literary writer and a master’s level philosophy student at the University of New Mexico. His work is regularly published in a variety of outlets including, but not limited to, Zin Daily, The Cabinet of Heed, and The Mindful Word. His first book has been recently published with small press Alien Buddha Press entitled The Assumption of Death which can be purchased in paperback format here.
Pin it!
