37. "RE: We're all in this together." In response to In response to 32
> >>The 'it's none of your/my business' argument sounds pretty >>anti-intellectual to me. > >I honestly don't know what you're getting at here.
You said 'it's not my field nor is it yours' which I took to imply our readings of these abstracts aren't relevant or valid. I have a degree in philosophy and I've studied sociology and gender theory, queer theory (haven't studied critical race theory but I've read alot). But I don't see how that should make a difference.
>What seems anti-intellectual to me is the implicit claim among >the sources you keep linking to that if academic papers don't >match up with someone's childish preconceived notions, then >they must be vacuous nonsense.
Well, my contention is the standard I'm employing isn't a childish preconceived notion....it's the intellectual tradition of critical thinking and rationality. I mean...several of these papers literally attack the concepts of rationality and critical thinking as a 'white' and 'male' and 'heterosexual' complex that need fixing.
>>But I'm assuming you can chime in on this: >> >>https://twitter.com/RealPeerReview/status/777564353096617986 > >The philosophy and sociology of science are rich and complex >subjects, and the meaning and purpose of the "scientific >method" has been a perennial topic of discussion. Beyond that >I don't have anything to say, because I don't know anything >about the context of that particular paper.
Abstracts are supposed to convey the context of a particular paper. And I can't help but feel that you're playing dumb here. I apologize because it's kinda cheap to refer to your motivations....but they are suggesting the abandonment of the scientific method. I....er....uh....really?