... refers not to the card game, but to an 18th century Edinburgh social club -- The Poker Club -- whose members included philosophers Adam Smith and David Hume. The moniker, attributed to Smith, meant to invoke an image of the pointy-hooked fireplace tool used to "stir things up." The club was like a Meetup for Enlightenment-era literary and political discussion (lubed with good food and alcohol , of course). My blog's title is a paean to the (original) Poker Club.
The blog's subtitle came to me while thinking about my reasons for unleashing Yet. Another. Blog. on the ol' Webnets. Alas, yetanotherblog.com was already taken and, besides, wasn't descriptive of my purpose for public writing. Since my intent was to post the more finished bits from my long-hand journals for further development and critical scrutiny, I wanted the stated theme to reflect something about the topics I tend to "poke" at or turn over in mind again and again, id est, liberty, sovereignty and security in particular, and legal theory and political philosophy in general.
This being a modern, casual venue, not every entry will be primarily philosophical in nature (as the previous three entries attest). My aim going forward, though, is to use this space as a public sketch pad-cum-notebook. Like a set of figure studies for a painting or a logbook of lab experiments, this blog is meant for showing my working thoughts rather than my final statements. As Robert Nozick wrote:
One view about how to write a philosophy book holds that an author should think through all of the details of the view he presents, and its problems, polishing and refining his view to present to the world in a finished, complete and elegant whole. This is not my view. ... There is room for words on subjects other than last words. (Anarchy, State and Utopia, xii)
-30-
2 comments:
Interesting effort. However, a curious and opaque subtitle, despite your explanation. "Tendering...embers" is a strange turn of phrase--did you perhaps mean "Tending...embers"? But even the latter doesn't imply agitation or "stirring". Also, the analogy fails if one attempts to envision a flame of discourse or thought coalescing one ember at a time--not an overly stimulating prospect. Incidentally, what sort of clues do you plan to post?
You're right, Anon. My fondness for veiled wordplay and private jokes doesn't necessarily translate the way I think it does. Your point is well taken.
To clarify, my usage of 'tender' is its archaic sense, and the "one clue at time" reference is a nod to one my viewers (back when).
Hope this helps.
Post a Comment