/lit/ - Literature

>>16542758
>feeling like a know nothing idiot
You either have that situation because you have a good enough grasp of your field or you don't deserve the title you've got. What's your field? faggot

>>16542796
Political Science

>>16542819
how the fuck can you be grounded on a topic like Political "Science"
get real faggot

>>16542758
Forget paper qualifications, unless they're just to get you a job. Autodidactism is the way to go.
Some of the dumbest people in this universe are academics. Steer clear of those faggots.

>>16542819
Just watch the news and look for hot takes to put on your Twitter. You'll be a professional anon and can walk into grad school acting like a big shot.

>>16542819
Social science is pseudoscience.

>>16542819
>politics
>science
Pick one. For you, any further involvement in academia would be disappearing further down the rabbit hole.

>>16542758
>>16542819
It depends on what audience you are aiming to share it with. If it is meant to be something academic, then yes, you need to read and study a lot more. If it is something more for laymen, like an essay in a magazine or a colomn, then you would probably be fine without it. Further academic training is always a good way to improve, but is a huge commitment. And I don't think it GUARANTEEs you will be in such a position by the end of it.
Out of curiosity, how many books in total do you estimate you've read in and around the field?
Oh, and Here's a quote from Weber that might let you take heart about you current anxieties:
>Normally such an 'idea' is prepared only on the soil of very hard work, but certainly this is not always the case. Scientifically, a dilettante's idea may have the very same or even a greater bearing for science than that of a specialist. Many of our very best hypotheses and insights are due precisely to dilettantes. The dilettante differs from the expert, as Helmholtz has said of Robert Mayer, only in that he lacks a firm and reliable work procedure. Consequently he is usually not in the position to control, to estimate, or to exploit the idea in its bearings. The idea is not a substitute for work; and work, in turn, cannot substitute for or compel an idea, just as little as enthusiasm can. Both, enthusiasm and work, and above all both of them jointly, can entice the idea.

>>16544615
>Political Science
>tries to give actual advise

>>16544615
huh?

>>16544615
I'm definitely not trying for a highly academic audience.
probably somewhere around or so 120 Satsuki Senpai

>>16542758
>When do you know enough about something to write something worth sharing?
when you feel inspired to

>>16544743
>when you feel inspired to

>>16542758
>>16542819
I have a bachelors in poli sci and the answer is indeed grad school. You absolutely need to go get your masters. It will open up far more opportunities for you

>>16544814
Alright, I'll start looking at applying. Thanks anon.

>>16544702
What context do you want to write it in?
>>16544631
As long as you know the limitations of the method of inquiry, there is nothing wrong with political science. It has its own virtues.

>>16544814
>You absolutely need to go get your masters. It will open up far more opportunities for you
Care to elaborate?

>>16542893
>Autodidactism is the way to go
Spoken like someone who never went to college.

>>16546607
I went and I agree with him. Just more efficient but less resources

>>16546620
So you think you learnt nothing over and above what you would have learnt had you simply read it by yourself? That assessments, lectures, discussion of material, and office hours have no pedagogical benefit?

>>16542758
>I've read 26 books in and around my field of study since then and still don't feel like I've gained any ground at all.
stop speedreading

>>16544814
Do you have a masters then? How do you know this?

>>16546698
Yes. The only benefit university provides is a piece of paper improving your employability.

>>16542893
>Autodidactism is the way to go.
Autodidactism is how you get Kantbot and Girardfag.

>>16546698
They don't I'm sorry lol. If anything it was just a bunch of big-dick contests. I dropped out after the first few weeks because my English professor, among others, would praise my work then give me 50's on them. I just got tired of it but everyone in class knew he was a pos and fucked w him so he stopped being a teacher but he ruined my idea of college and it's slow anyways. I study way more omo

>>16547041
What's wrong with Girardfag?

>>16542758
Typically after professorship and doing your own research on whatever the topic of the book will be
No one will take anything you write seriously before then

>>16542758
>feeling like a know nothing idiot
The feeling that you know nothing is accurate, less in the epistemological sense, and more in comparison to the set of all knowable things. Embrace the feeling, because you are embracing the humbling truth that there's too much for any one person to ever know. Don't fool yourself with the lie that you know enough, or be convinced by people who present themselves that way, because they're always bullshitting.

>>16542758
>>16542819
What part of poly sci? IR, demostic policy, or political philosophy?
If you want to understand IR read John Mearsheimer and Kenneth Waltz (as realism is the only real worthwhile part in IR), if you are interested in domestic policy just leave poly sci and go into psychology or economics. If it is political philisophy read Kant's critique on practical reason and John Rawl's theory on justice. If you are a radical (left or right) give up studying it and just read whatever /pol/ or /leftypol/ wants you to read and fuck off to their containment boards. I am also got my BA in pols tho I'm working in analytics currently and hated academia too much to continue to rot my mind in that world.

>>16542819
Fake field invented post-war to justify neoliberal political economy.

>>16547719
Depends, by and large that is only demostic policy (which is innately normative so what a surprise). IR is full of realists (which is not at all neo liberal) and political philosophy has a ton of radicals outside of the Rawl fans.

>>16544814
This advice is bullshit. Use your degree to get a job doing something and then use the experience you get in that to choose how to further your education.

OP anon, it's not a lack of knowledge you have. It's a lack of experience. Spend some time doing anything. Observe how the world works through the lens of what you learned in school. Find a niche, and then go for it.

>>16547745
>realists
>in politics
So they disband themselves?

>>16544900
>Alright, I'll start looking at applying. Thanks anon.
This is putting the horse way ahead the carriage. A PhD isn't something you just "get" like you get a bachelor's. It's a research degree, aimed at furthering the knowledge at the bleeding edge of whatever your specific discipline. A PhD is not really something you get just because it'll look good. Although there are people like this, they're usually the dropouts. A PhD program is something that's mostly for the true enthusiasts, but even enthusiasm isn't enough, because each and every PhD should (in a perfect world) constitute new ground broken by the candidate. The problem a lot of people have is that they just can't find a question to be asked that hasn't been sufficiently answered yet. This is something you can't really force and it's something only you can figure out for yourself. Just ask yourself honestly: have, in the course of any of your studies, ever wondered about some specific academic concept, looked for the answer, only to find that nobody has made the connection you have? Or not answered it in the context you're coming from? This isn't even the hard part, because you then have to thoroughly research it to the point where you can convince a bunch of stuffy cunts as to the salience of the question and that your angle is sufficiently erudite that they should admit you to their program.