Always felt most appealing acads were masters of analogy - a unique ability to downsample their lofty ideas into relatable, perhaps even punchy hooks. Common denominator of Sagan / Cathy O'Neil / Hofstadter / Kahneman / deGrasse Tyson / Hawking / Deutsche ?
-
-
-
I'm talking specifically about academic leftist humanities people who talk academic pomoese... Derrida/Foucault stuff.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
When was it fun? Examples? Reform possible?
End of conversation
-
-
-
That language style fits the writers in my experience. “You’re with us or a nazi” isn’t helpful if you’re drive-by curious.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I think it goes beyond language. The general attitude there is that idle curiosity is bourgeois elitism. The luxury of the privileged.
-
And that curiosity always reinforces a power hierarchy. That’s why asking someone where they are from is rude. An anthropologist visiting an Amazonian tribe is suspect.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
ITS
NOT THEIR JOB TO EDUCATE YOU!!!11Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
the UX of discourse itself
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.