Where? What did we say that made you come to this conclusion?
Don't you think we tried that!? I was told I was problematic and would have failed if I didn't produce what was wanted. One of us is forbidden from raising the issue in academia at all. We couldn't get published. We have still addressed it directly outside the academy.
-
-
That's part of why I feel you're aiming your aiming a tank at what (at worst) is more a fly in ointment. (Putting my reservations with that tank aside -- a separate discussion.)
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Besides the conceptual underpinnings of the work you critique, I also could never understand it or write that way because of the opaque style or the heavyhandedness of the theory. But I found other quarters where that wasn't necessary: history, public health, sociology were fine.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Like I said, and like Kuhn observed, paradigms are more often than not hardened, intractable, and maintained by stubborn gatekeepers. (What's new?) But the academy is large enough now that you can be rejected by one quadrant and accepted by another.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.