Monday, June 15, 2009

method and madness

Why do academics need to be objective? Or is it a matter of converting thought to text that does it? i begin to worry seriously that i will lose perspective? and maybe that is the beginning of this journey....
Posted by at

4 comments:

  1. de oranje stoombootJune 15, 2009 at 9:42 PM

    who told you academics are, or need to be objective? if you meet one, please tell me, i want to come and watch...
    what is the point of a perspective if it's not flexible?

    ReplyDelete
  2. AnonymousJuly 4, 2009 at 4:29 AM

    exactly else - academics are NEVER objective - especially those that claim to be objective...

    On the other hand what we cannot do is to state opinions without backing them up on multiple levels
    and showing where they come from - in terms of the site being examined , existing and past conversations (literature) in the discipline and other works and thoughts related to the object/subject/site of study and so on.

    Its called grounding. That actually people on the field working towards change are compelled to do in another way on a daily basis.

    The use of "objectivity" and academic "expertness" to flatten and to shy away from having to produce in-depth explanations is just plain bad academics

    :)

    we are engaging some of these issues in my online class on Critical Online Ethnography - so I am back on my soap box of lecturing and ranting online...

    ReplyDelete
  3. AnonymousJuly 4, 2009 at 4:31 AM

    method IS madness

    ReplyDelete
  4. AnonymousJuly 4, 2009 at 4:32 AM

    oops actually

    madness IS method?

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)