Anecdotal evidence, case studies, qualititative methodologies, speculation & of course theory, all have a vital place in scholarship. What I object to is simply advocacy masquerading as a scholarly discipline. https://twitter.com/rgcooke/status/1005446623839899649 …
-
This Tweet is unavailable.Show this thread
-
And how do you know if a field is engaging in advocacy rather than scholarship? The first thing to look at is its scholarly principles. Does the field self-correct? Does the field have a mechanism by which it falsifies its own hypotheses? Does it welcome criticism?
15 replies 116 retweets 488 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @clairlemon
By that standard, philosophy would fail, too, even though it is not activist. Academia still has a number of scholastic enclaves
0 replies 1 retweet 4 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
The problem that killed philosophy as a discipline is that you can pick an indefensible hill to build a house on, and you will never be forced to move away from it. And since the good hills are mosty taken, philosophers are incentivized to pick bad ones if they want recognition.
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.