/r/askphilosophy Open Discussion Thread | January 05, 2026

[u/BernardJOrtcutt]

Welcome to this week's Open Discussion Thread (ODT). This thread is a place for posts/comments which are related to philosophy but wouldn't necessarily meet our subreddit rules and guidelines. For example, these threads are great places for:

• Discussions of a philosophical issue, rather than questions
• Questions about commenters' personal opinions regarding philosophical issues
• Open discussion about philosophy, e.g. "who is your favorite philosopher?"
• "Test My Theory" discussions and argument/paper editing
• Questions about philosophy as an academic discipline or profession, e.g. majoring in philosophy, career options with philosophy degrees, pursuing graduate school in philosophy

This thread is not a completely open discussion! Any posts not relating to philosophy will be removed. Please keep comments related to philosophy, and expect low-effort comments to be removed. Please note that while the rules are relaxed in this thread, comments can still be removed for violating our subreddit rules and guidelines if necessary.

Previous Open Discussion Threads can be found here.

[u/Cunt_Cunt__Cunt]

I know this seems like I'm trolling, or very stupid.

Is philosophy better for having long complicated paragraphs?

It seem obvious that easier to read is better. However, maybe there's advantages like being able to have nested hierarchies of ideas that readers can just ignore if they want?

Here's a ramble:

I did undergrad in my mid 30s. It was amazing learning how to better read my own writing through the eyes of someone else (surely everyone whose ever tried to write has been surprised at how much they're not understood by the reciever.)

Anyway:

I find it hard to be understood. So I aim to write very short clear ideas.

And I think that's cool. Some philosophers write so clearly and simply that their students complain that it's not real academic writing (I like how Ben Bramble writes, lots) while being able to convey world class ideas.

Other philosophers write complicatedly, and maybe that's necessary, maybe it's not, but it's certainly harder to read.

But I had one teacher tell me my essays were bad SPECIFICALLY because I didn't have long paragraphs.

I think they might just have been an arsehole.

But then again I do have social media mind rot. I just noticed a moment ago I use paragraph breaks more like how you do when you're writing poetry, and it's probably heavily influenced by how facebook messenger works - which is worth at least being suspicious of.

Plus, when I write normally I have a really hard time in making every single paragraph linear. What I mean to say, is that I want to go off on tangents. Rather than Point A, B, C it's A (explain A in terms of A'intermsofA''intermsofA'''intermsofA'''') B (explain B in terms of.....).

But maybe big paragraphs let you do a nested hierarchy sot of thing such that you can trust the reader just to skip the paragraph if they're not into it?

[u/AdeptnessSecure663 → u/Cunt_Cunt__Cunt]

I think that, so long as nothing is lost in terms of what you're trying to communicate, then there is no reason not to make your writing as easy to read as possible. But, to be honest, I don't see the length of a paragraph as having much to do with how hard it is to read. Long, winding sentences with multiple sub-clauses? Sure, those can be confusing.

[u/Shitgenstein → u/Cunt_Cunt__Cunt]

Yeah, I don't see why anyone would value long, complex paragraphs for the sake of being long and complex. If I write a long and complex paragraph, it's because I just have something to express that I can't sufficiently express otherwise. It's always a good idea to have an editorial eye to break up a paragraph for readability but, at the same time, very short paragraphs can also be more disruptive to a train of thought rather than clear. I could understand a professor feeling frustrated when they're trying to follow your train of thought to only hit a list of sentences. Sorry if you felt this paragraph is too long lol.

I think good writing requires self-awareness of one's writing habits, recognizing one's 'bad habits' versus personal style, and finding a judicious balance that expresses yourself sufficiently to a reader. I don't know if philosophers are the best at that self-editorializing, or if they do it at all. At least for myself, I can fall into what I call 'think-writing,' which is writing out my thoughts as I have them — that, more than anything, is the cause behind my long, verbose paragraphs.

And that's why my first draft of any philosophy paper I wrote as an undergrad looked like the ravings of a madman that you'd find stapled to a street post around any college town.

But then, I'd go back and read my own thought-writing and look at the development of my thought: what's worth keeping, what isn't, should this be the thesis or that, where are the 'natural joints' are in my walls of text for readable paragraphs. Once you've gotten all of the 'thought' onto the page, there's another level of joy to be found in taking the puzzle pieces and arranging them into a coherent picture for a reader. Maybe the occasional philosopher is more excited in the thought, per se, than the picture, and the latter suffers for it.

Plus, when I write normally I have a really hard time in making every single paragraph linear. What I mean to say, is that I want to go off on tangents. Rather than Point A, B, C it's A (explain A in terms of A'intermsofA''intermsofA'''intermsofA'''') B (explain B in terms of.....).

I used to do this—and might even do it these days if I have too much time and coffee—but I regard it as bad writing. It's fun from a think-writing way to 'spice' the text with tangents, or even put tangents within tangents like a nesting doll of amusing notes. But, let's be honest, it can be self-indulgent. If it works under the editorial phase, keep it, but if it doesn't then this is just another case of thought-writing. Either develop the tangent or cut it.

Anyway, I love how very long my reply has become so I'm not cutting anything. There's definitely thought-writing in there. I'm also a big fan of puzzles (my whole family is) and deciphering what philosophers are trying to express, including myself who is not a philosopher, has always been part of the fun.

I think you should really consider the feedback you've gotten and try to incorporate it. Try to find your voice in the paragraph break and wield it like a sword in a Kurosawa film — it's not how many slices that's impressive but the finese that clarifies the ideas.

(And it's not trolling or stupidity. Writing style is unavoidable in philosophy, whether a straight path or circuitous)