3 ms·
I'm impressed, was pretty good, it's a bit biased and leaves out some important people (i.e. Duns Scotus, Sigmund Freud) as well as some modern philosophers but
by cjohansson 8y ago
I'm impressed, was pretty good, it's a bit biased and leaves out some important people (i.e. Duns Scotus, Sigmund Freud) as well as some modern philosophers but that was expected. The user-experience is not very good. I also think it's a trap to think philosophy as a linear-progress and this presentation kind of enhances that view. But anyway the content is good, the presentation could be improved
- philippoi 8y agoI thought it actually undermined the philosophy as linear-progress by focusing on the links, which show a chaotic cycle of idea development. The linearity of the names seems to come from going with time on that axis, but that's just an arbitrary device for the sake of organization rather than the driver of the interpretation of the content, in my view.
- cjohansson 8y agoYes good point, the connections are really good in that sense. The time-scale is a bit misleading at least for me. I don’t know how it could be improved, maybe each segment of connected philosophers could have their own time-scales. I’m not sure time is as relevant really, some questions are timeless as well as different answers to them..
- philippoi 8y agoI like that idea of using time in a way that scales better or chunks relevant sections together. There's definitely room for improvement in how time is exhibited in this interface.