Critique of Webphil: Moderns

I think if we are really going to make this blog or website legit, we need to have a way to complete our assignments behind the scenes and then only publish/publicize/publicare(latin) that which is meant to go to the public(English). That which is sharable or share-worthy.


For example, if someone was to read the posts from our last class, they were all very good on their own and shared unique insights and where exactly what we were supposed to do, but if someone who didn't understand the format of our class was to stumble upon the blog and read them all together, they might find them a little redundant.

• Lisa: "Kant talked about primary and secondary qualities."
• Topher: "The modern view is that there are two types of qualities; primary and secondary."
• Issac: "The terms primary and secondary qualities came into being when speaking about something or some idea."

To all summarize the same material in our own unique ways is the point of the first and second drafts, but the public might not want to see all these. These are good on their own, but messy and disorganized when together.

Maybe it's time to create a site or use the WordPress Isaac already created to make WebPhil into what moderns would classify as secondary qualities; something beautiful, good, and useful. Something we could share with our friends, that the masses would understand, and that would look professional.

Unless, we are going for the idea talked about in class that "the struggle to interpret is what makes something beautiful." Because if that's the case, .daetsni taht od tsuj s'tel