I'm writing this philosophy paper on philosophy of mind and desire, right? Standard stuff. My professor recommended Lauria's work because I'm interested in the deontic view of desire—basically this idea that desiring something means representing it as how things ought to be. Cool stuff.
I finally get my hands on the federico lauria 2014 dissertation through my university library database. "The Logic of the Liver." Weird title, but okay. I'm reading along, highlighting passages, feeling smart. Then I get to footnote 397.
Guys. FOOTNOTE 397.
It's this dense, tiny little block of text at the bottom of some page, and it's like Lauria just casually drops this entire alternative philosophical framework in like six lines. He's addressing some objection about his deontic view, and in the footnote, he mentions this obscure Meinongian distinction that apparently "deserves more attention than the present work can accommodate." And then he just... moves on. Back to the main text like nothing happened.
I've been stuck on this footnote for THREE DAYS. I've追 down every source he cited in it. I've read papers I'm not even sure I understand. I'm supposed to be writing about his main argument, but instead I'm down this rabbit hole of early 20th-century Austrian philosophy because of ONE FOOTNOTE.
Has anyone else had this experience with academic writing? Where a single footnote derails your entire research process? Part of me is annoyed, but part of me is actually fascinated. Like, what didn't he have room to say? What's in the ideas he had to cut? I might email him. Do philosophers answer emails from undergrads?
I finally get my hands on the federico lauria 2014 dissertation through my university library database. "The Logic of the Liver." Weird title, but okay. I'm reading along, highlighting passages, feeling smart. Then I get to footnote 397.
Guys. FOOTNOTE 397.
It's this dense, tiny little block of text at the bottom of some page, and it's like Lauria just casually drops this entire alternative philosophical framework in like six lines. He's addressing some objection about his deontic view, and in the footnote, he mentions this obscure Meinongian distinction that apparently "deserves more attention than the present work can accommodate." And then he just... moves on. Back to the main text like nothing happened.
I've been stuck on this footnote for THREE DAYS. I've追 down every source he cited in it. I've read papers I'm not even sure I understand. I'm supposed to be writing about his main argument, but instead I'm down this rabbit hole of early 20th-century Austrian philosophy because of ONE FOOTNOTE.
Has anyone else had this experience with academic writing? Where a single footnote derails your entire research process? Part of me is annoyed, but part of me is actually fascinated. Like, what didn't he have room to say? What's in the ideas he had to cut? I might email him. Do philosophers answer emails from undergrads?
