Form VS Content

Click here for larger view

So take a look at the above graphic. The better jokes some people have done on Facebook are usually called a "meta-Jokes" and it is amusing because what is being made fun of or caricatured is not the content, but the form of what people tend to do. The picture above shows the form of what may usually take place in an actual Facebook interaction, but instead of what people are saying, the focus is on what they are actually doing and the form of that communication.

Let me illustration with an example to illustrate form vs content and why this can really save you so much time when interacting/debating with people. Some of you who have taken any introduction to philosophy have probably ran into this annoying situation:

A radical skeptic walks up to you and argues that you cannot trust your senses.

Okay, so what are you tempted to do here? If you feel yourself tempted to argue back with this person with some intellectual argument then you have fallen for this person's trap by engaging the content and you totally bypassed the form of the interaction. So let me break it down for you.

Obviously the content is what the person is saying, that you cannot trust your senses.

If you had paid attention to the form of the communication, you would have noticed that this person came up to you and spoke to you so that you could hear him clearly that you cannot trust your senses, which, by the way, would also include your hearing. Do you see the internal contradiction? The contradiction is that somebody telling you that you cannot trust your senses has to use your senses since how the hell else are you going to listen to this person?

Along the same lines is something even more clear: You receive a postal letter from me explaining how the postal system doesn't work. The content is somewhat similar but the form is exactly the same. The form is contradicting itself since the sender, me, intended to prove that the postal system did not work but by receiving the letter it is obviously not the case that the postal system doesn't work.

See why form and content are important? If in the above examples you had focused on the form of it first, then by the time you read or heard the content you would understand that the other person is obviously shoot them self in the foot before they could even begin.

Here's a more challenging example: What if I came up to you and argued that all disputes cannot be settled except by violence?

You could bypass the form and start arguing with the content (the conclusion that disputes can only be resolved by violence) by trying to come up with abstract examples that hope to counter the person's argument. If this person is a good sophist they can probably keep you occupied with that all day long with his own counter examples.

If you are understanding the concept of form you will have observed the form of the communication. Not just what he is doing but how he is doing it. Regardless of the content, if this person is just arguing with you then there is this implicit assumption in the form of argumentation that there is a disagreement and that disagreement is going to be resolved by way of argumentation and, hopefully, appeal to logic and reason. Obviously once somebody starts using violence that is a completely different form from using words to make arguments and then listening to somebody's response back. Now, we also notice in the example that I did not punch you in the face or use violence; I am trying to convince you that disputes (including that one) cannot be resolved without the use of violence but I doing the opposite of violence by trying to persuade you with reasoning.

If you had caught on to the form of the argument you would have asked me if I disagreed with you so much then why did I launch into an argument designed to persuade me with reasoning when what you're saying is that to resolve a dispute like this you should have used violence against me.

You can also think of form and content as: form = the methodology by which something is done and content = the conclusion or leading to the conclusion.

Check out this podcast from a popular philosophy show called Freedomain Radio with more on this here.

Afterthoughts: This might be related.