>> For the record, I have already graduated college (with a major in math and economics). Oh, the undergrad bit wasn't in any way meant as an ad hominem or the

>> For the record, I have already graduated college (with a major in math and economics). Oh, the undergrad bit wasn't in any way meant as an ad hominem or the like. Apologies if it came across as such. >> I do think that being readable by a larger audience is an advantage, all else being equal, to being readable by a smaller audience. I don't necessarily disagree with this statement, all I am pointing out is that there are limits to how wide an audience a given paper can address. Specifically in more abstract papers (e.g. philosophical papers) is a profound knowledge important, especially in the history of thought and the foundations of our modern philosophy, together with the objections raised along the way. To give just one example, if you want to actually talk about something as abstract as postmodernism (an internet favourite, as shown also by xkcd etc.), you will need to know about its genesis, about its criticism of structuralism, modernism, idealism, society, art as an institution, the avant-garde movements etc. All I am saying is while addressing a wider audience is an admirable goal, it becomes harder and harder to achieve the higher the paper's complexity. >> In an experimental paper, sure, the abstract is written last. Coming from a non-experimental background, I still don't know anyone writing their abstract first. First comes an interest, an idea, something one doesn't understand, believes to understand, something one finds irritating, interesting etc. Then one keeps digging deeper, looking at other people's work and interpretation while simultaneously structuring one's ideas, arguments and problems. The abstract of a paper -- in my opinion -- can only be given after this process of sorting and structuring, of testing, evaluating and discarding is over. So I would like to disagree that a philosophical paper is the result of a vastly different thought process in terms of structure and argumentation.