Too difficult for students of philosophy

[Albertosaurus Rex]

Well, I'm baffled. Recently, a new edition came out of The Elements of Moral Philosophy, a very good introduction to ethics. This new edition has been shortened and simplified. Yes, simplified.

In the new edition, I've replaced scores of "vocabulary words" with words that all students know. For example, I rewrote or deleted the sentences in the fifth edition in which these words appear:

congenital 1; impasse 10; proscription 14, 194; circumscribed 22; impetus 23; postulate 24; shabby 29; chaste 36; infallible 38, 39; alack 40; latter 41, 107; conflate 47; impeccable 47; to fashion 48; perennial 54; precepts 63; injunctions 63; incurring 69; deflationary 74; pretensions 74; rebuttal 74; augment 90; truism 90; votaries 93; prohibiting 94, 149; cohorts 105; unintelligible 113; vicarious 119; renouncing 121; beneficence 132; recidivism 136; commodious 141; insurrection 143; subjugating 160; subordinating 161; druggist 163; harmonization 171; secular equivalent 174; divine fiat 174; directives 174; inextricably 175; sumptuous 178; nonarbitrary 179; rebuke 181; myriad 182; demurs 185; preceding 186; proceeding 186; jettison 187; admonition 189; precedence 189; impelled 193; coerce 195; native endowments, native talents 202.

I did not do this reluctantly; I did not lament that "if students had better vocabularies, then this wouldn't be necessary." After all, simpler sentences are better. As a reader, I prefer short, crisp, easy prose.

Nor did I accept the lazy--and contemptuous--excuse, "If students want to know what that word means, then they can look it up." After all: (1) Each word the student doesn't know is a barrier to the student's ability to understand the text. (2) Each word the student doesn't know is a reason for the student to stop reading. (3) Students shouldn't have to consult dictionary.com in order to learn about Kantian ethics. (4) And, realistically, they won't--instead, they will try to discern the meaning from context, and they won't always succeed. (5) Unusual words can be distracting to students. Recently, Douglas Husak gave a lecture at my university titled, "Four Points About Drug Decriminalization." After the lecture, a bright student came up to me and said, "It took me half the lecture to realize that 'decriminalization' just means 'legalization!'" This often happens. Words that seem normal to professors seem weird to students, and the students wind up thinking about the words rather than the ideas.

(Source)

You know, as a Dutch freshman four years ago, these words never caused me any trouble. And he made these changes for a public whose native language is English. Surely philosophy students can be counted on to have a sizeable vocabulary? This is doing students a disservice.

[Nuytsia]

Hmmm I agree in general with his reasoning, but why were those words previously understandable and now they aren't?
Ok some I can understand - who the heck uses the word 'alack' in the past 200 years??

I must admit there were a couple of words there I didn't precisely know the meaning of, but on the whole I don't think they'd have most native English speakers reaching for a dictionary.

If he has another word that can exactly convey the meaning I think he should feel free to use it. However, I'd love to see what words he used instead of the ones he removed. I think I'd have a hard time coming up with substitutes that could adequately stand in for a lot of them.

[Albertosaurus Rex]

This page has extensive [Stuart Rachels does not approve this word] information about the changes between the fifth and sixth editions. The page numbers for each word are given, so it's fairly easy to track the replacements down.

The phrase "Alas! Alack!" was used as an example of someone expressing an emotion (In response to the stock market going down.) This was part of a section describing the emotivistic viewpoint, in which ethical statements are regarded as emotive expressions in disguise, instead of fact-stating language.

Just how low has people's vocabulary gotten when perfectly commonplace words like "shabby" and "latter" are on this list? Also consider the word "nonarbitrary". If you know what "arbitrary" means - and Rachels assumes that you do, since "arbitrary" isn't on this list - you have to be able to work out what "nonarbitrary" means. Gaaaah.

['thul]

These beings have noted a tendency within languages that indicate that the majority of those whose mother language is english speak it a bit worse than those who have learned it over several years study. They have also noted that some of them seem to think that because its their native language, they will naturally speak it fluently, and thus have a harder time accepting critisism.

[Nuytsia]

The phrase "Alas! Alack!" was used as an example of someone expressing an emotion (In response to the stock market going down.) This was part of a section describing the emotivistic viewpoint, in which ethical statements are regarded as emotive expressions in disguise, instead of fact-stating language.

Hehee I can not imagine ANYONE saying 'alas! alack!'........ I can think of a far more emotive phrase to express a response to the stock market going down.....

Agreed, it's a bit scary to think people would have trouble with most of those words. But in general I dislike the use of unnecessarily elaborate language.

'thul I think native english speakers are a lot more casual with the language than people who have learned it as a second language who are a lot more correct in their usage. I would call myself fluent in my native language, but more often than not probably gramatically incorrect!!!!

['thul]

Indeed. There are many levels to "fluent"...

[Albertosaurus Rex]

I am currently in the process of composing an e-mail to Stuart Rachels, the author. However, I have to phrase it very carefully. While the main gist of it is "Your changes suck", I do understand that it was done with good intentions. (And criticism doesn't have to be mean, anyway.)

[Nuytsia]

I hope he doesn't reply with 'your email sucks'

Well bring on the constructive criticism, it'll be interesting to see what he thinks.