A quick question game
In light of the Wittgenstein reading and the rest of the course material we've already tackled, I'd like to present a few questions of my own (sans any actual answers though).
Before I start though, I would like to note that after reading part one, I may be beginning to understand why parents often get annoyed when children ask so many questions. For normal parents, there comes a point in which you are backed in a corner with a question that you don't actually have an intelligent answer for. Children are like Wittgenstein, they expose your assumptions and lack of logic application that is supposed to be the mark of adulthood and humanity (in this case, academia).
Are we supposed to be just grappling with the material? or demonstrating mastery over it? Metaphorically, are quotes my medals of honor and discussion points my battle stories? (scars included)
We've talked about the fractalization of the discipline and its presentation as a nicely outlined family tree of sorts, and the importance of understanding the scholarly heritage of those in the field we choose to cite, but what about research interest areas that are not limited to political science/IR? For example, development literature, depending on the path you take crosses many disciplines, POLS, Econ, earth science, I've even seen work in sociology journals and this list is by no means exhaustive. How can we ascertain the scholarly heritage of scholars in fields in which we are not familiar?
Labels: are fractals my friends?, heritage, questions, the discipline, Wittgenstein
posted by TAW at 10:41 AM
2 Comments:
Here's a tentative, unsophisticated, make-do answer.
The #1 lesson I've learned here is that I need to be reading a lot more. This is because answering big questions requires having done a lot of reading, and there is no way to assess the scholarly heritage of fields outside of Political Science and International Relations except by doing a lot of reading.
The #2 lesson is that researchers are people who do research. By this I mean that reading and intellectualizing are not ends in themselves, but are directed toward a purpose.
Let me explain by means of analogy. My sister is an artist. She spent a lot of time in art school, in art galleries, and around people who profess to be artists. Some of these people wear black, drink espresso, hang out in cool places, wear funky glasses, feel deeply, think complex thoughts, live exotic lives . . . but do not produce art. Contrast this to someone who doesn't fit the image, but produces art.
My point is this: I plan to produce research. To do this, I need to read widely and wrap my head around difficult philosophical questions, but I also need to produce research. The reading, the questioning, the answering has a purpose. Everything I read, I read with that purpose in mind.
This comment about kids annoying their parents with too many questions just made me HAVE to share this Louis C.K. video. Please skip ahead to minute 7:00 and a apologize if you are offended by any of the sailor talk.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4u2ZsoYWwJA&feature=related
Post a Comment
<< Home