Re: this is a tragic situation now the comedy

Responses below:

Yocum Daniel GS 21 CES/CEOE wrote:

> You missed what I was saying. Not all humanities work has a valid point. A
> bridge does because you drive over it but is there good and bad humanities
> work? Yes.

It seemed to me like the discussion was about the value of a specific -field- of
study, not the value of some of the individual work done within it.

> Trash? This is an honest examining of the subject how? No direction
> leaning slant here?
> Daniel

Yes, Daniel, I think a good many of the links you provided were trash. Poor
reasoning and questionable research. And I think I'm appealing to standards you
wouldn't argue with -- like what kind of evidence warrants what kind of
conclusion, etc.

> Yes but it is obvious when this arrogant engineer is being unreasonable and
> you the craftsman can point this out with simple arithmetic.

The example I used was oversimple. The point is that the engineer won't admit
he's wrong no matter how "obvious." He's in an office in CA and knows more than
someone standing in the very room itself. There's just no getting around it --
I worked with these guys for years, and some of them were real pieces of work.

Some were pretty sharp, though.

> There are
> precious few examples of a non-expert correcting an expert in humanities.
> That is the problem Jim. That is how elite humanities academic types play
> the shell game, it all becomes rhetorical three card Monty.
> Daniel

I don't know about non-experts correcting experts, but I do know experts correct
experts all the time. In humanities work, on the idea end, anyone can have an
idea. On the knowledge end, you just need to put in the time reading.

> Yes, and there are ways to check them when their opinion of themselves
> exceed their abilities, even by a non-lawyer or physician.
> Daniel

BS. You need the guts to walk out on them, period. To demand a second opinion,
to fire the lawyer, etc. There's no more checks and balances in these
professions than there are elsewhere.

> So what? This is your field of chosen profession and you say so what? What
> system do you propose as check and balance? You want academic freedom with no
> response from anyone outside your world? Tough Luck Maynard.
> Daniel

I see no need for a check and balance -- some academics say stupid things, other
academics accuse them of saying stupid things, and readers need to decide for
themselves.

Neither do I see a need to demand this profession be free of the faults plaging
every other profession.

That's the bottom line, Daniel. We all need to think for ourselves.

Jim

-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
Received on Mon Sep 29 22:25:57 2003