Follow @PoliticsIE
 
 
 
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 58

Thread: "Grievance Studies"; your grief, our money

  1. #41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by twokidsmanybruises View Post
    In English yes, often. ( but following the etymology of the world, “mankind” shouldn’t be considered sexist ) German, though, uses “man(n)” as a gender neutral pronoun, like English used to use “one”.

    We see the same misunderstandings with “human” and “history”. “History” has never been “his-story”, so “her-story” might be inventive word-ply, but it has no etimopogical basis.

    My point is that, while this word-play might be used to illustrate a point, misunderstanding the historical root of words, and then using that misunderstanding to make a point about sexism in language is not a good thing to do. As it’s based on a false premise, which can be easily debunked, all these type of arguments result in a loss of credibility for the person presenting then.

    Which is a shame, as they might have other, valid arguments.
    But the point doesn't need to (nor do I think it really is) be reliant on an etymological claim of the sort you describe above.

    It can simply be the fact that men are the default in our ordinary linguistic practices.
    Repeal the 27th.

  2. #42
    Politics.ie Member A Voice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    6,753
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mercurial View Post
    But it didn't prove that at all.

    Did you actually read the papers they wrote?

    Of the ones that were accepted, most relied on falsified data, and the rest were deliberatlely constructed in order to avoid making obviously absurd claims.



    But this has happened plenty of times in those disciplines - the only difference is the motivations of the fraudsters.
    For you, Merc Black=White.
    Nonsense papers were passed. Please show me the nonsense papers in Chem or Biol.

  3. #43
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    10,481
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Clanrickard View Post
    Yes because Philosophy courses don't start with pre-conceived and fixed ideas. Read the laughable intro to the Gender Studies course in UCD.

    [...]
    Two types of people pursue 'Gender Studies' courses, fools and knaves.

    The former are those who are credulous enough to believe that they're studying something worthwhile and the latter are those who hope one day to have a sinecure teaching 'Gender Studies'.

  4. #44
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    851
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Orbit v2 View Post
    Sounds fascinating

    As they say "gravity is only a theory"
    Quote Originally Posted by A Voice View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by A Voice View Post
    For you, Merc Black=White.
    Nonsense papers were passed. Please show me the nonsense papers in Chem or Biol.
    Researcher at Japan stem cell institute falsified nearly all images in 2017 paper Retraction Watch

    Stem-cell researcher guilty of falsifying images | New Scientist

    Lancet Retracts Wakefield Paper

    BBC NEWS | Asia-Pacific | S Korea cloning research was fake



    Those are just cases I specifically remembered. There a lots of them, lots and lots.
    If you were wrong, how would you know?

  5. #45
    Politics.ie Member twokidsmanybruises's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Location Location
    Posts
    6,757
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mercurial View Post
    But the point doesn't need to (nor do I think it really is) be reliant on an etymological claim of the sort you describe above.

    It can simply be the fact that men are the default in our ordinary linguistic practices.
    I'm going to get back to this, but the real world is being squeaky, so it's getting the oil...
    Reality is that which, when you stop believing it, doesn’t go away. - Philip K. Dick

  6. #46
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    851
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    It occurs to me that you were asking about nonsense papers; ones that don't even pass a cursory inspection; There are many of those, even to the point of there being computer generated texts published in Engineering papers. There is a lot of work being done on the peer-review process showing just how lax the standards are, and it's not at all restricted to the humanities.
    If you were wrong, how would you know?

  7. #47
    Politics.ie Member McTell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    I travel a lot on business
    Posts
    5,829
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Iusedmename View Post
    ///

    BBC NEWS | Asia-Pacific | S Korea cloning research was fake



    Those are just cases I specifically remembered. There a lots of them, lots and lots.

    It wouldn't be a problem if a paper was treated like a book and seen as the author's personal take on things.

    But they have to be peer-reviewed by other academics, and if they are still rubbish it looks bad for the process. You don't know how much mutual backscratching is going on.

    Papers are the currency of academia, they obsess about how many times their paper was quoted.

    Our profs are being paid €150,000 pa, while a german prof will expect half, 70-80,000. Does this prove that our unis are twice as good as the germans'? No, it only proves that the state can be easily shaken down by another interest group.

    Bring in internet teaching, free access to academic journals, shorter courses, and that 2 billion cost pa will drop off the cliff.
    McTell tCurrently, I am missing certain information. That has been requested and will be added as soon as it is available available availableavailable

  8. #48
    Politics.ie Member A Voice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    6,753
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    This is not the same thing at all. Look up "hoax" in a dictionary.

    The cases you mention - and you may as well throw in the most famous of all from East Anglia where unwanted data was buried by climate change ideologues - feature manipulation of results within the parameters of accepted research procedure.

    Dishonest research for ideological or career gain by people who respect their discipline and wish to prosper within it is not the same as utter nonsense perpetrated by people who despise a discipline and wish to further discredit it by tricking its gatekeepers into accepting balderdash and then laughing at them.

    Sokal was a physicist; Lindsay is a mathematician. They cobbled together horse manure masquerading as sociology and post-modernist philosophy. Because these disciplines are permeable to outsiders because they are so off-the-rails with faddish stupidity that they are easy to parody and undermine.

    One of the trio's hoax papers, published in April by the journal Fat Studies, claims bodybuilding is "fat-exclusionary" and proposes "a new classification...termed fat bodybuilding, as a fat-inclusive politicized performance." Editor Esther Rothblum said the paper had gone through peer review, and the author signed a copyright form verifying authorship of the article. "This author put a lot of work into this topic," she said. "It is an interesting topic, looking at weight and bodybuilding. So I am surprised that, of all things, they'd write this as a hoax. As you can imagine, this is a very serious charge." She plans to remove the paper from the Fat Studies website.

    A hoax paper for the Journal of Poetry Therapy describes monthly feminist spirituality meetings, complete with a "womb room," and discusses six poems, which Mr. Lindsay generated by algorithm and lightly edited. Founding editor Nicholas Mazza said the article went through blind peer review and revisions before its acceptance in July, but he regrets not doing more to verify the author's identity. He added that it took years to build credibility and get the Journal of Poetry Therapy listed in major scholarly databases. "You work so hard, and you get something like this," he said. Still, "I can see how editors like me and journals can be duped."

    Affilia, a peer-reviewed journal of women and social work, formally accepted the trio's hoax paper, "Our Struggle Is My Struggle: Solidarity Feminism as an Intersectional Reply to Neoliberal and Choice Feminism." The second portion of the paper is a rewrite of a chapter from "Mein Kampf." Affilia's editors declined to comment.
    Anti-PC Writers Tricked Seven Academic Journals Into Accepting Hoax Papers on Dog Rape, Fat Phobia, and More - Hit Run : Reason.com

  9. #49
    Politics.ie Member Finbar10's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    2,375
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)

    Default

    There are limits to what journal reviewers can actually check. They can certainly check if the methodology seems to be sound (or the analysis and conclusions derived from the data and statistical tests on the data). However, they cannot realistically rerun experiments. They do have to essentially accept at face value the data a researcher said they produced. That's why there's an emphasis on replication (where some independent researcher or team goes away and produces similar data and conclusions using similar methods).

    Of course, in the cases in the OP there isn't really data involved. One of the reviewers' tasks is to spot BS!
    γνῶθι σεαυτόν

  10. #50
    Politics.ie Member McTell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    I travel a lot on business
    Posts
    5,829
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Finbar10 View Post
    There are limits to what journal reviewers can actually check.
    //

    Of course, in the cases in the OP there isn't really data involved. One of the reviewers' tasks is to spot BS!

    Exactly.

    But if there was, the motto of the first scientific body, the "royal society" of London in 1660 had a motto "nullius in verba", meaning: take nobody's word for it / take nothing on authority.
    McTell tCurrently, I am missing certain information. That has been requested and will be added as soon as it is available available availableavailable

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •