From Lance Nathan’s blog
An Open Letter
Dear [□ Sir / □ Madam / □ Representative / □ Journalist / □ Idiot],
I know you believe you know a great deal about
[□ linguistics / □ children's literature / □ law / □ psychology / □ other (please specify)]simply because you
[□ use language / □ read Harry Potter and Goodnight Moon / □ watch Law & Order / □ have a mind],or because you’ve read a newspaper article about
[□ the lack of numbers in Pirahã / □ Dumbledore being gay / □ some Supreme Court decision / □ Prozac].But please understand that the issues in this field are far more complicated than you realize. For instance, the field isn’t all about
[□ proper grammar / □ writing children's books / □ litigation / □ schizophrenia];those of us practicing in the field spend much of our time reading articles, synthesizing facts, and seeking a deeper understanding of [□ language / □ literature / □ law / □ the mind]. I’m not saying that you can’t have an opinion until you’ve
[□ understood an article by Chomsky / □ read every Caldecott and Newbery Medal winner / □ argued a case before the Supreme Court / □ spent three years running rodents through mazes]—in fact, most of the people in our field have never done that. But we’d appreciate it if you either consult an expert, or educate yourself a little more by
[□ taking a course or two / □ taking a course or two / □ taking a course or two / □ taking a course or two]
[...]
via Language Log
What here is called ‘people practicing in the field’ refers to people getting paid for ‘time reading articles, synthesizing facts, and seeking a deeper understanding of” something. The people this text pretends to adress don’t. Maybe they get paid for a very different approach to topics, like journalists, or they don’t get paid, or recognized for it, at all.
The “I’m not saying that you can’t have an opinion until you’ve” becomes a farce, and “But we’d appreciate it if you either consult an expert, or educate yourself a little more by
[□ taking a course or two" is just another way of saying:
Shame on you! You’re no academic! If you dare to open your mouth about this, make sure to suck up by at least trying to emulate one. Get you’re okay from an ‘expert’ (how I hate this word), or for god’s sake, take a course, because, you know, I had to take way too many to get my job. You should at least pay for playing on my turf!
This is completely ridiculous. It is a clear sign of exactly what I mean, and am trying to avoid, when I say I have to take a break from university after my degree because it makes you stupid in the long run if you don’t.
By the way, by this logic both my father and to a large extent my boyfriend would not be ‘legitimate’ writers about anything that borders on an academic subject.
You really want to prove what an arrogant prick you are? Because you just did.
So.
I don’t want to add hurt to injury and, by writing this response, prove myself to be an even more contemptibly arrogant individual than you knew me to be, but, and I tend to write this often, because it often applies, please, read carefully before you leap, er, in this case: attack.
The things you quoted (from something I myself quoted, btw., nothing in this post, apart from “from” and “via” are my words)are suggestions. A linguist, who are strange people anyway (they don’t use their brains as much as they should, really)tells you, he’d “appreciate” you “taking a course or two”. Is he talking about legitimation? Is he saying: shut your trap about things you don’t understand? Is he? If he is I really must be brushing up on my English. So. Reread it and we can continue by saying
he’s obviously not saying these things. Nothing you are attacking in your comment really hits a target (oh it hurts me, but I’m both fat and endowed with a large ego, I’m easy to hurt, er, hit).
The salient sentence in this letter is “But please understand that the issues in this field are far more complicated than you realize”.
This is something many people really could take to heart, including me. Taking a course is not the only or even the best way to realize and amend that. I tend to recommend reading. Like, books. Everybody can do that. It’s not even such a large expediture, time-wise.
Asking an expert does not mean sucking up to academic ‘wisdom’. It means asking people who know their way around a topic in order, for example, to get reading advice. I do that all the time. I did that when I went to school, when I hadn’t been an academic. Almost everything I consider to have been worth reading in those days was recommended by others, some of which were academics.
It doesn’t preclude thinking. But thinking before ‘knowing’ (I know that this is a kinda wobbly concept) isn’t worth much. So if you decide that certain things about the Schiavo case are true and you draw general conclusions from that, aren’t your conclusions harmed by the fact that you oversimplified the Schiavo case to an extent that borders on falsifying it? How much worth are inductions if they are based on faulty evidence? Please tell me.
That’s what this letter is about and which careful reading would have revealed to you. It’s not attacking nonacademics. Just look at the first three paragraphs and then at the last one, which I have not quoted (I included a link). It just restates the point I have tried to make in my embarrassingly arrogant manner (I’m trying to change that. Not all that easy. It’s a good tool to cover up insecurity, though). If you are making general statements about, for example, whether “someone on trial is clearly innocent or guilty ” on the basis of watching law and order or having read a newspaper article about a supreme court decision, your reasoning is bound to be faulty in some way or other. You can be right, but that would be, like, chance, wouldn’t it?
There’s nothing wrong with reading a book before you talk. I talk about things I have not read about loads of times. But I ask. For links, books, explanations. I always ask. You can check with anybody. If someone is knowledgable about something I am not, I will ask him for reading advice or links.
So.
Where does being an acedemic enter the picture?
ghost___
when I read this posting
initially
I took it for the blog equivalent
of a Forward
not something you were necessarily subscribing to
as I know you would more likely say
“read a book”
than “take a course”
o the cursed dichotomies:
academics vs non-academics
men vs.women
over- vs. under-educated
if only we could all be
thinker/dreamer/imaginers
open to wonder