This is a reflection on the relation between “professional philosophers” and blogs inspired by a blog post by Catarina Dutilh Novaes:
“Professional philosophers”, i.e. not philosophers at all but philosophy teachers, will take blogs seriously when there is a selective entry requirement to reading and publishing them, based on academic performance indexed principally (but not exclusively, just … massively) on socio-economic origin. An elevated entrance and subscription fee would be necessary, plus quantified evaluation schemes. Lastly, just agreeing with the ideas and style of an influential pressure group, while not an absolute pre-requisite is a big help. The finality, of course, is getting ahead in one’s career.
For me blogging has allowed me to speak in my own name on philosophical subjects, something that I still want to do despite the almost total lack of dialogue that I encountered in academia. I usually run into such non-dialogical attitudes and behaviour on “philosophy” blogs, which is why I copy almost all comments I make on them and rework them into articles on my own blog. Otherwise they tend to disappear, get deleted, be ignored, or get only lip-service replies. So having my own blog is just basic self-defence against the very narrow mimetic ritual recognition between colleagues, both actual and potential, that props itself up on the internet in lieu of a fruitful conversation.