TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
I've also heard the anecdote about the test with the "why..." question
whose answer was "why not?", which suggests that this may be an urban
legend. More importantly, I see it as an incomplete answer.
The value of philosophy is to explore concepts in a rigorous manner.
If you approach philosophy with a receptive mind, you can stretch your
mind quite nicely, and learn many interesting things by so doing. It
also teaches invaluable skills in analyzing an issue for its
consequences and implications, in constructing an argument, and in
trying to understand complex issues. Interestingly, we do this every
day as tech. writers, so perhaps there's some relevance to philosophy
after all. Answering "why not?" isn't philosophy, it's chicanery. I'd
give the student an A for creativity and an F for relevance to the
question.
--Geoff Hart #8^{)}
geoff-h -at- mtl -dot- feric -dot- ca
Disclaimer: These comments are my own and don't represent the opinions
of the Forest Engineering Research Institute of Canada.
