This is a clear and worthwhile thread.
But I wonder how one addresses the weaponization of ambiguity that occurs when ordinary academic uses of a term are condemned on the basis of the term's non-academic meaning(s). This is the stuff the culture war is made of, it seems to me.
But I wonder how one addresses the weaponization of ambiguity that occurs when ordinary academic uses of a term are condemned on the basis of the term's non-academic meaning(s). This is the stuff the culture war is made of, it seems to me.
https://twitter.com/roderickgraham/status/1367137066639835137
It's not quite the same issue, but there's also a sleight-of-hand involved in -- for example -- smuggling specific, pseudo-scientific claims about race into public discourse under the cover of broader and more innocuous terms ("population", "demographics").
In both cases I think the divergence between academic and non-academic understandings of the terms is not simply a by-product of miscommunication but the necessary condition for attacking academic work as a danger to the public, civilization, etc, etc.
And as such it's carefully nurtured by a slew of pseudo-lexicons, "translations from the wokish," and so on, designed specifically to preclude good-faith efforts to bridge the gap from either side.
NB None of this detracts, I think, from the points being made in the OT. I am less concerned here with ordinary or passive readers and more with active attacks on academic work from the IDW and their ilk.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
