Continuous essays are made possible by modern technology. Here the possibility of composing studies or trials becomes fluid, dynamic; responses and feedback can be almost instantaneous, thus allowing for corrections or modifications to the underlying assumptions of particular trials. Notes can be compared. References can be updated by further evidence.
In short, abolishing and relinquishing the comfort of so many idees fixes. My preference for the notion of continuous thought in general is directly related to my suspicion of monolithic claims. When I say "monolithic claims," let it refer to the well-abused and routinely slandered concept of Platonic Ideas. Be that as it may, I am not much interested in that worn controversy. My interest is in the potential for the opposite, actually. The practice is already established even, though of a noticeably low standard colored with vitriolic and savage hyperbole - often precisely where one longs to be persuaded by intellect and pragmatism.
In the same spirit, my first response to this theme is that it is not very revolutionary, since we could simply think of the evolution of writing, data accumulation, literature, history - the entire treasure of human knowledge - as just this sort of thing. Granted. But there exists the difference with regards to the immediacy and speed whereby knowledges and techniques today are generated and forced to adapt, and such a difference calls out for positive exploitation. Forums should be arenas as well as forums, and all ideas should be open for any challenge. Even my own. Especially my own.
No comments:
Post a Comment