December 30, 2017, at 02:55 PM (0 comments)
How should footnotes work? There’s the in-text footnote reference (usually a superscript numeral), and there’s the footnote itself, which is part of a block of footnotes where each footnote is labeled with its corresponding reference. On a web page, the footnote reference is a hyperlink to the footnote; and the footnote has a backlink to the footnote reference. (This is in order that the reader may click a footnote reference; read the footnote; then click the backlink, to return to the same place in the text where they found the footnote, without having to scroll.)
Constructing all of these things manually is a chore. That’s where the Footnotes recipe (enabled by default on all wikis) comes in.
First, let’s look at how you’d have to do this manually, without footnote markup:
BY the ancients, Logic and Dialectic were used as synonymous terms; although ''logizesthai'', “to think over, to consider, to calculate,” and ''dialegesthai'', “to converse,” are two very different things. The name Dialectic was, as we are informed by Diogenes Laertius, first used by Plato; and in the ''Phaedrus'', ''Sophist'', ''Republic'', bk. vii., and elsewhere, we find that by Dialectic he means the regular employment of the reason, and skill in the practice of it. Aristotle also uses the word in this sense; but, according to Laurentius Valla, he was the first to use Logic too in a similar way.%link footnote id=fnr1%[[#fn1 | '^1^']] Dialectic, therefore, seems to be an older word than Logic. Cicero and Quintilian use the words in the same general signification.%link footnote id=fnr2%[[#fn2 | '^2^']] This use of the words as synonymous terms lasted through the Middle Ages into modern times; in fact, until the present day. But more recently, and in particular by Kant, Dialectic has often been employed in a bad sense, as meaning “the art of sophistical controversy”; and hence Logic has been preferred, as of the two the more innocent designation. Nevertheless, both originally meant the same thing; and in the last few years they have again been recognised as synonymous. >>footnote id=fn1<< %footnote-number%1%% He speaks of ''duochereiai logikai'', that is, “difficult points,” ''protasis logike'', ''aporia logike''. [[#fnr1 | ⇑]] >><< >>footnote id=fn2<< %footnote-number%2%% Cic. in ''Lucullo: Dialecticam inventam esse, veri et falsi quasi disceptatricem''. ''Topica'', c. 2: ''Stoici enim judicandi vias diligenter persecuti sunt, ea scientia, quam'' Dialecticen ''appellant''. Quint., lib. ii., 12: ''Itaque haec pars dialecticae, sive illam disputatricem dicere malimus''; and with him this latter word appears to be the Latin equivalent for Dialectic. (So far according to “Petri Rami dialectics, Audomari Talaei praelectionibus illustrata”. 1569.) [[#fnr2 | ⇑]] >><< |
BY the ancients, Logic and Dialectic were used as synonymous terms; although logizesthai, “to think over, to consider, to calculate,” and dialegesthai, “to converse,” are two very different things. The name Dialectic was, as we are informed by Diogenes Laertius, first used by Plato; and in the Phaedrus, Sophist, Republic, bk. vii., and elsewhere, we find that by Dialectic he means the regular employment of the reason, and skill in the practice of it. Aristotle also uses the word in this sense; but, according to Laurentius Valla, he was the first to use Logic too in a similar way.1 Dialectic, therefore, seems to be an older word than Logic. Cicero and Quintilian use the words in the same general signification.2 This use of the words as synonymous terms lasted through the Middle Ages into modern times; in fact, until the present day. But more recently, and in particular by Kant, Dialectic has often been employed in a bad sense, as meaning “the art of sophistical controversy”; and hence Logic has been preferred, as of the two the more innocent designation. Nevertheless, both originally meant the same thing; and in the last few years they have again been recognised as synonymous. 1 He speaks of duochereiai logikai, that is, “difficult points,” protasis logike, aporia logike. ⇑ 2 Cic. in Lucullo: Dialecticam inventam esse, veri et falsi quasi disceptatricem. Topica, c. 2: Stoici enim judicandi vias diligenter persecuti sunt, ea scientia, quam Dialecticen appellant. Quint., lib. ii., 12: Itaque haec pars dialecticae, sive illam disputatricem dicere malimus; and with him this latter word appears to be the Latin equivalent for Dialectic. (So far according to “Petri Rami dialectics, Audomari Talaei praelectionibus illustrata”. 1569.) ⇑ |
That’s pretty cumbersome! Let’s see how it looks using footnote markup:
BY the ancients, Logic and Dialectic were used as synonymous terms; although ''logizesthai'', “to think over, to consider, to calculate,” and ''dialegesthai'', “to converse,” are two very different things. The name Dialectic was, as we are informed by Diogenes Laertius, first used by Plato; and in the ''Phaedrus'', ''Sophist'', ''Republic'', bk. vii., and elsewhere, we find that by Dialectic he means the regular employment of the reason, and skill in the practice of it. Aristotle also uses the word in this sense; but, according to Laurentius Valla, he was the first to use Logic too in a similar way.[^#1^] Dialectic, therefore, seems to be an older word than Logic. Cicero and Quintilian use the words in the same general signification.[^#2^] This use of the words as synonymous terms lasted through the Middle Ages into modern times; in fact, until the present day. But more recently, and in particular by Kant, Dialectic has often been employed in a bad sense, as meaning “the art of sophistical controversy”; and hence Logic has been preferred, as of the two the more innocent designation. Nevertheless, both originally meant the same thing; and in the last few years they have again been recognised as synonymous. [^#1 He speaks of ''duochereiai logikai'', that is, “difficult points,” ''protasis logike'', ''aporia logike''.^] [^#2 Cic. in ''Lucullo: Dialecticam inventam esse, veri et falsi quasi disceptatricem''. ''Topica'', c. 2: ''Stoici enim judicandi vias diligenter persecuti sunt, ea scientia, quam'' Dialecticen ''appellant''. Quint., lib. ii., 12: ''Itaque haec pars dialecticae, sive illam disputatricem dicere malimus''; and with him this latter word appears to be the Latin equivalent for Dialectic. (So far according to “Petri Rami dialectics, Audomari Talaei praelectionibus illustrata”. 1569.)^] [^@^] |
BY the ancients, Logic and Dialectic were used as synonymous terms; although logizesthai, “to think over, to consider, to calculate,” and dialegesthai, “to converse,” are two very different things. The name Dialectic was, as we are informed by Diogenes Laertius, first used by Plato; and in the Phaedrus, Sophist, Republic, bk. vii., and elsewhere, we find that by Dialectic he means the regular employment of the reason, and skill in the practice of it. Aristotle also uses the word in this sense; but, according to Laurentius Valla, he was the first to use Logic too in a similar way.1 Dialectic, therefore, seems to be an older word than Logic. Cicero and Quintilian use the words in the same general signification.2 This use of the words as synonymous terms lasted through the Middle Ages into modern times; in fact, until the present day. But more recently, and in particular by Kant, Dialectic has often been employed in a bad sense, as meaning “the art of sophistical controversy”; and hence Logic has been preferred, as of the two the more innocent designation. Nevertheless, both originally meant the same thing; and in the last few years they have again been recognised as synonymous. 1 He speaks of duochereiai logikai, that is, “difficult points,” protasis logike, aporia logike. ⇑ 2 Cic. in Lucullo: Dialecticam inventam esse, veri et falsi quasi disceptatricem. Topica, c. 2: Stoici enim judicandi vias diligenter persecuti sunt, ea scientia, quam Dialecticen appellant. Quint., lib. ii., 12: Itaque haec pars dialecticae, sive illam disputatricem dicere malimus; and with him this latter word appears to be the Latin equivalent for Dialectic. (So far according to “Petri Rami dialectics, Audomari Talaei praelectionibus illustrata”. 1569.) ⇑ |
Much better.
You can also define footnotes inline:
BY the ancients, Logic and Dialectic were used as synonymous terms; although ''logizesthai'', “to think over, to consider, to calculate,” and ''dialegesthai'', “to converse,” are two very different things. The name Dialectic was, as we are informed by Diogenes Laertius, first used by Plato; and in the ''Phaedrus'', ''Sophist'', ''Republic'', bk. vii., and elsewhere, we find that by Dialectic he means the regular employment of the reason, and skill in the practice of it. Aristotle also uses the word in this sense; but, according to Laurentius Valla, he was the first to use Logic too in a similar way.[^#1 He speaks of ''duochereiai logikai'', that is, “difficult points,” ''protasis logike'', ''aporia logike''.^] Dialectic, therefore, seems to be an older word than Logic. Cicero and Quintilian use the words in the same general signification.[^#2 Cic. in ''Lucullo: Dialecticam inventam esse, veri et falsi quasi disceptatricem''. ''Topica'', c. 2: ''Stoici enim judicandi vias diligenter persecuti sunt, ea scientia, quam'' Dialecticen ''appellant''. Quint., lib. ii., 12: ''Itaque haec pars dialecticae, sive illam disputatricem dicere malimus''; and with him this latter word appears to be the Latin equivalent for Dialectic. (So far according to “Petri Rami dialectics, Audomari Talaei praelectionibus illustrata”. 1569.)^] This use of the words as synonymous terms lasted through the Middle Ages into modern times; in fact, until the present day. But more recently, and in particular by Kant, Dialectic has often been employed in a bad sense, as meaning “the art of sophistical controversy”; and hence Logic has been preferred, as of the two the more innocent designation. Nevertheless, both originally meant the same thing; and in the last few years they have again been recognised as synonymous. [^@^] |
BY the ancients, Logic and Dialectic were used as synonymous terms; although logizesthai, “to think over, to consider, to calculate,” and dialegesthai, “to converse,” are two very different things. The name Dialectic was, as we are informed by Diogenes Laertius, first used by Plato; and in the Phaedrus, Sophist, Republic, bk. vii., and elsewhere, we find that by Dialectic he means the regular employment of the reason, and skill in the practice of it. Aristotle also uses the word in this sense; but, according to Laurentius Valla, he was the first to use Logic too in a similar way.1 Dialectic, therefore, seems to be an older word than Logic. Cicero and Quintilian use the words in the same general signification.2 This use of the words as synonymous terms lasted through the Middle Ages into modern times; in fact, until the present day. But more recently, and in particular by Kant, Dialectic has often been employed in a bad sense, as meaning “the art of sophistical controversy”; and hence Logic has been preferred, as of the two the more innocent designation. Nevertheless, both originally meant the same thing; and in the last few years they have again been recognised as synonymous. 1 He speaks of duochereiai logikai, that is, “difficult points,” protasis logike, aporia logike. ⇑ 2 Cic. in Lucullo: Dialecticam inventam esse, veri et falsi quasi disceptatricem. Topica, c. 2: Stoici enim judicandi vias diligenter persecuti sunt, ea scientia, quam Dialecticen appellant. Quint., lib. ii., 12: Itaque haec pars dialecticae, sive illam disputatricem dicere malimus; and with him this latter word appears to be the Latin equivalent for Dialectic. (So far according to “Petri Rami dialectics, Audomari Talaei praelectionibus illustrata”. 1569.) ⇑ |
(After a footnote has been defined inline like this, subsequent references to the same footnote need include only the number, as in the previous example.)
If you don’t need to refer to the same footnote twice (i.e., if you don’t have multiple footnote references pointing to the same footnote), and if you are content to let PmWiki number your footnotes automatically, then you can even skip the numbers:
BY the ancients, Logic and Dialectic were used as synonymous terms; although ''logizesthai'', “to think over, to consider, to calculate,” and ''dialegesthai'', “to converse,” are two very different things. The name Dialectic was, as we are informed by Diogenes Laertius, first used by Plato; and in the ''Phaedrus'', ''Sophist'', ''Republic'', bk. vii., and elsewhere, we find that by Dialectic he means the regular employment of the reason, and skill in the practice of it. Aristotle also uses the word in this sense; but, according to Laurentius Valla, he was the first to use Logic too in a similar way.[^He speaks of ''duochereiai logikai'', that is, “difficult points,” ''protasis logike'', ''aporia logike''.^] Dialectic, therefore, seems to be an older word than Logic. Cicero and Quintilian use the words in the same general signification.[^Cic. in ''Lucullo: Dialecticam inventam esse, veri et falsi quasi disceptatricem''. ''Topica'', c. 2: ''Stoici enim judicandi vias diligenter persecuti sunt, ea scientia, quam'' Dialecticen ''appellant''. Quint., lib. ii., 12: ''Itaque haec pars dialecticae, sive illam disputatricem dicere malimus''; and with him this latter word appears to be the Latin equivalent for Dialectic. (So far according to “Petri Rami dialectics, Audomari Talaei praelectionibus illustrata”. 1569.)^] This use of the words as synonymous terms lasted through the Middle Ages into modern times; in fact, until the present day. But more recently, and in particular by Kant, Dialectic has often been employed in a bad sense, as meaning “the art of sophistical controversy”; and hence Logic has been preferred, as of the two the more innocent designation. Nevertheless, both originally meant the same thing; and in the last few years they have again been recognised as synonymous. [^@^] |
BY the ancients, Logic and Dialectic were used as synonymous terms; although logizesthai, “to think over, to consider, to calculate,” and dialegesthai, “to converse,” are two very different things. The name Dialectic was, as we are informed by Diogenes Laertius, first used by Plato; and in the Phaedrus, Sophist, Republic, bk. vii., and elsewhere, we find that by Dialectic he means the regular employment of the reason, and skill in the practice of it. Aristotle also uses the word in this sense; but, according to Laurentius Valla, he was the first to use Logic too in a similar way.1 Dialectic, therefore, seems to be an older word than Logic. Cicero and Quintilian use the words in the same general signification.2 This use of the words as synonymous terms lasted through the Middle Ages into modern times; in fact, until the present day. But more recently, and in particular by Kant, Dialectic has often been employed in a bad sense, as meaning “the art of sophistical controversy”; and hence Logic has been preferred, as of the two the more innocent designation. Nevertheless, both originally meant the same thing; and in the last few years they have again been recognised as synonymous. 1 He speaks of duochereiai logikai, that is, “difficult points,” protasis logike, aporia logike. ⇑ 2 Cic. in Lucullo: Dialecticam inventam esse, veri et falsi quasi disceptatricem. Topica, c. 2: Stoici enim judicandi vias diligenter persecuti sunt, ea scientia, quam Dialecticen appellant. Quint., lib. ii., 12: Itaque haec pars dialecticae, sive illam disputatricem dicere malimus; and with him this latter word appears to be the Latin equivalent for Dialectic. (So far according to “Petri Rami dialectics, Audomari Talaei praelectionibus illustrata”. 1569.) ⇑ |
See the Footnotes recipe info page for details.
