Cool to see humanities Twitter dunking on research they’ve not actually read based on a PR piece (hell, mostly the headline). Way to model informed and generous engagement with scholarship and show what’s behind your anti-gatekeeping rhetoric.
-
-
I think the mistake is, on the basis of a bad PR write up, to come out guns blazing and assume that the article itself is making a claim that simply replicates what the humanities already knows. The NHB article frames itself w/in specialized debates in linguistics, cog. sci., &c.
-
And I’d happily swap out “gatekeeping” for something like “turf-defending” if the latter doesn’t assume the kind of power diff. you see as required by the former. We may disagree, but I still think the reflexive dunking is shitty behavior that does nothing to help the humanities.
Keskustelun loppu
Uusi keskustelu -
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.