/lit/ - Literature

giga based

>>14840126
infinitely based. citations are absolutely pathetic

>>14840126
So just plagiarize with impunity?

>writes fictitious stories of ideological opponents practicing his teachings

>>14841647
Yes.

>>14841647
You're not supposed to reference outside texts at all, pleb.

Having to cite inane horseshit that no one will verify is the worst part about college.
The fact that his attitude infects midwits is even worse.
It's fine when you're actually saying something and explaining the source and why you're using it, especially when it comes to common misconceptions.
But you're not trained to do that in collegiate writing. The "source" is a Platonic ideal of an absolute authority, the "expert," an ivory tower toolbag who dispenses functionally omniscient truths to his dullard underlings, only applicable by their place in the academic system rapidly deteriorating in all fields of study.
Whether they're full of shit or not, or they're obsolete? That's irrelevant. All Hail the Expert.

devastatingly based

>>14841976
The whole of modern scholarship would collapse, if that were the case.

>>14840126
dangerously based

>>14842052
and that's a GOOD thing

>>14840126
catastrophically based

>>14842052
And nothing of value was lost

>>14842009
This

Citations are the hyperlinks of old media. They are there to point scholars to sources that discuss the topic in more detail, so you can stay on topic and avoid repeating yourself. If your thesis is subjective, you don't need to do this as much; in fact, too much makes you look like an ass-kisser. But there's no way around it If you're writing about a real-world topic like science or history.

The biggest sinners are:

1. Crappy scientists who pad out their publications with references to pretend that they actually did research

2. People like DFW and Garrison Keillor who write multi-page footnotes because they're too lazy to edit

3. Writers that forget to add references to genuinely interesting stuff. Conspiracy theorists do this a lot because they are usually untrained writers trying to discuss a complex topic.

>>14842125
>>14842452
Ah, so you are retarded. Never mind.

>>14841647
Total originality.
>>14842052
Good.

>>14842711
>Crappy scientists who pad out their publications with references to pretend that they actually did research
this
My coauthors love doing that shit. I'll reference like 12 papers and they'll reference like 40 more for no fucking reason aside from an attempt to make the paper look more "serious"

>>14842843
How do you write a history book or physics paper without citing sources?

>>14841647
It's not plagiarism. He expects you to know what sources he's citing already.

>>14842711
Don't forget the house of cards citations like you get in wiki.
>His research was widely discredited [1]
->Scholars criticised his methodology (Ibel, p 202)
-->I've always maintained that he was a moron.

>>14842873
Leave it as an exercise for the reader.

>>14842711
>Better known for other work
kek

>>14842009
Absolutely retarded take. The point of citations isn't to refer to an absolute authority. It's so that people can check up on what exactly you are using as sources for factual assertions so that they can make up their minds about how credible they are. Otherwise they're left to just decide if your assertion "sounds right," without even knowing why you made it.

>>14843349
That may work for casual essays on literature, but not in any serious field of inquiry.

Citations are the tools of second rate minds created in order to slow down the artistic process of the geniuses among us. It is the writing of ressentiment.

>>14845813
>muh serious field of inquiry
holy faggotry

>>14845819
>refuses to participate in Wissenschaft
Wew lad

>>14840126
based
nobody gives a shit about your career or the name you want to build for yourself. Are we trying to speak truth or be narcissists?

>>14845854
>Are we trying to speak truth
How do you know what you say is true? Cite your sources.

>>14844911
absolutely retarded that that don't understand he's saying that in practice it never is this even if it ought to be.

>>14842873
same way you did, just skip the citations?

>>14840126
Guys there is a really great French poet by the name of Shakespeare who wrote surrealist verse in the 9th ce.

>>14845863
if it's a study, sure
if it's an argument, then it can stand on its own

>>14845839
Im way too dumb. Got to second grade, teacher had some diagram about water going up into the sky, down mountains and into rivers or something, I said that's it, im done.

>>14845872
You think I just wrote a history book or physics paper without citations?

>>14845866
Undergrads and high school teachers not understanding good academic practices isn't an argument against those practices.

>>14845879
If the argument rests on factual assertions, then those premises need to be backed up with evidence.