/lit/ - Literature

>>18277661
Wow that is awful writing, and I’m the guy who likes bullshit like luhman

>>18277661
>have own belief
>write it
>look up people before you who coincidentally have said belief by googling key words
>pretend to be grounded in academia

>>18277661
Big ethos make good number go up!

>>18277661
that's just academic masturbation.
I think with the citations they hope to water down the pseudo- and make it seem more of a -science

>>18277661
>How can you enjoy writing like that, or even reading it?
If it's actually dealing with profound topics, like Coomaraswamy's writing

>>18277795
this is the true art of scholarship, professional academics will never get it.

>>18277661
Sociology shouldn't exist

>>18277661
>the absolute state of academia

>>18277661
every citation to an authority gives the author more credence to write what they write and come to the conclusion they may. Or do you wish to refute 100 papers?

>Enjoy writing or reading a paper
what

>>18277661
Does anyone understand what the fuck they're talking about?
>film tourist tribal membership
They're talking here about bugmen who use consumer products to gain a sense of identity?

>>18277996
Some kind of group identity based on group identification with the media

>>18277996
>Does anyone understand what the fuck they're talking about?
it is deliberate by the author. whether because they don't fully understand what they speak of or more likely they hope you don't. For example, spatial dimension should be geographical, unless they literally mean someone filming a few meters from another person. temporal is not just needlessly verbose but is inaccurate, as the next sentence is regards to consumption usage to, what exactly? Again this the point, by their deliberate obfuscation you can't really pick apart their work without a huge amount of effort and to communication with them.

Thus they are safe to publish without really saying anything, until someone cites the in their obfuscated paper, good luck with that.

>>18278122
Dude it's section 5.2.2, they probably explained what they meant in previous sections

>>18277661
>>18277795
References and citations is a literary device frequently used to invoke a feeling of truth, through an appeal to authority. Author uses citation and says: Look - what I am saying must be true, because it is what 'famous scholar x' has also said.

>>18277661
The evidence is mostly shitty, the studies not replicated, statistics grossly wrong. So the author attempts to gish-gallop you, so that you don't check and notice.

>>18277661
Sociology is filled with reference to appear serious.
It is an elaborate strategy established to make us forget how sociology is nothing more than pseudo-intellectual diarrhea ramblings made by mentally ill men and sexually unattractive women

>>18280087
sociology btfo

>>18277661
have you been to university?
you need the citations to pretend what you vomit onto the page is real so people believe you

>>18277661
>Why are they citing sources, shouldn't thay just be making shit up like my favorite philosopher

>>18280115
Sociologues adopt axioms and pretend they are verified and true.
For instance they will say :
Women and men are equal
Therefore any observable difference in outcome is the result of discrimination and/or culture.
Where in reality, they have not ever proved that men and women are equal.

They do that to project an illusion of legitimacy for their political bullshit.
They take a political opinion they have and then they devise a way to create data so they can say their political opinion is scientifically proven.

>>18277661
>Kim, Kim and Kim

>>18277661
> ""sociology""
> not a single formula or probability distribution in sight
Do ameritards really?

>>18277661
Academia needs to be purged

>>18280153
Unironically yes. Pick up any work from the 18th century or 19th century and it has more insight and erudition than anything written in the past 100 years.

>>18277795
This

>>18280153
>your hot takes bad, quoting hot takes from other people good

>>18280153
Yes

>>18277661
anyone have the meme of >>18280755
but with the pictures.

>>18280153
No one is against sources. We're talking source-flooding, which is notorious in psychology et al. And by "source-flooding" I mean giving so many sources that you hardly discuss any of them.

>>18277987
>>Enjoy writing or reading a paper
If you don't enjoy this shit then why do it?

>>18281207

>>18280153
that pic is not how you use sources properly. and 90% of it is only there for the sake of relating your writing to theirs in a totally superficial way. it's also a rabbithole with no end that you'll find actual substance.

people actually do the same shit when they have something real to say. just the reality of success in that environment requires them to appease the nonsense that everyone else does. e.g. develop idea that's totally unrelated to the trendy people / things to cite in your field (potentially personality cults) but you still need to shoehorn it in and pretend it is in fact just an extension of that work for it to be published and successful.

>>18281293
dank u.

>>18280235
This shot comes right out of the continental tradition, and you know it.

>>18280153
>he thinks sociology isn't full of assumptions and a priori positions

>>18277661
Modern academia is just a race for who can get the most references, so in fields like sociology, it's common to circlejerk each other (circlereference?) to improve your numbers.

I wrote like that in uni. near every sentence was cited. Just covering my bases. Got all As lol

>>18280755
>I forgot where I read this, but if my memory serves me it was in some reliable source
fucking jej

>>18280087
It's not an elaborate strategy. It's an incredibly simplistic strategy applied at a ridiculously inflated scale so that laziness insures survival. It's by definition a soulless tactic.

>>18280153
What >>18280159 said. A philosopher knows they are pushing the bounds of Truth so understand that it is their naked ego and beliefs on the line. Sociology hides behind a curtain of fabricated axioms that are supposed to be accepted as Truth through sheer weight of numbers. It's both cowardice and incredibly prone to rot.