Common Craft Blog
Disinterest in Academic Discourse
By leelefever on August 09, 2005 - 3:11pm
From time to time, I participate in conference calls and online discussions that are focused on subjects that I should care about: knowledge management, communities of practice, online learning, etc.
More often than not I find that these discussion become academic discourse and generally make me feel the same.
I honestly respect academic discussion and I believe academia lays the foundation for what we know and understand. But man, that kind of discussion is just not for me- and perhaps I'm revealing my ignorance here.
The theoretical, the ongoing discussion about the published papers of respected academics, the arguments about pros and cons of each theory and their applications in endless situations -- it all just drones on for me.
It reminds me of a quote from Edwin Armstrong, who invented the FM radio: "Men like to substitute words for reality and then argue about the words."
I don't want the words- I want the realities. It seems sometimes that reality beats me over the head so often that I wonder why the words matter in practice.
I also wonder why I feel this way. In my work, I want more than anything to live in the future. I don't want to put a theory into practice, I want to do things that
don't yet have words.
Perhaps I've convinced myself (right or wrong) that academic discourse is too focused on the past- especially regarding the Web, where things move so fast.
No matter what, I feel confident that I have learned this about myself and I'm going to stop feeling self-conscious about not being interested in academic discourse- it's just not for me.
Disinterest in Academic Discourse
Lee, what you've written here strikes a chord with me, but I have to wonder what the real difference is between academic discourse and blogging, for instance, when it comes to the "words vs. reality" world-view. One could argue that when you wear your blogger's hat you are just as guilty of substituting words for reality and then arguing about the words as any academic discourse. Or is "theory vs. reality" your real concern? Academic discourse need not always take place in a theoretical world.
And this business of "living in the future" is a fascinating concept, but just how does one do this? I'm more of a "live in the moment" kind of guy. Word.
Disinterest in Academic Discourse
Lee,
Once again I see what it is I like about you. I work in the academic sector but I am always bemused when a big money study comes out saying what people have known for years from common sense. I am with you on the realities...so I will come stand next to you in showing my ignorance. Academic discourse never has been my forte.
Disinterest in Academic Discourse
Carrick,
I hear what you're saying. I use the words vs. reality as a device from the quote. My point is really more about theory vs. reality and the kinds of discussion that transpire from each. I know I'm generalizing like crazy too.
It's funny, my wife mentioned that there might be something to the idea that there are creators and those that make meaning from creations. I almost posted it- but then I thought it might sounds too theoretical or academic. :)
Oh and I said I want to live in the future. I haven't quire figured it out yet, but I think it has something to do with AJAX or RSS.
TW, it's nice to have you here, standing beside me, pointing at Carrick.
Disinterest in Academic Discourse
> Perhaps I've convinced myself (right or wrong) that academic discourse is too focused on the past- especially regarding the Web, where things move so fast.
Academic discourse is a funny thing. Academics make a living by being smart; the thing is, it's generally easier to pretend to be smart than to _actually_ be smart.
I don't believe that the web moves too fast for academic discourse. Have you read any of Marshall McLuhan's theories on media? Have you seen John Seeley Brown's work that came out of Xerox Parc 30 years ago?
Academia's best and worst feature is that it is sheltered from a capitalistic system; which means that, for all intensive purposes, it is completely irrelevant for the here and now. Will it be relevant in the future? Well, I guess that's when we can look back and seperate the smart ones from the crooks.
Disinterest in Academic Discourse
Fun discourse going on here...
I'm a little unsure about "There are creators and those that make meaning from creations." Is it meant to be a put-down? Sure, creators are cool, but sometimes they just have no idea what to do with their creations, or even what they mean to the world. Artists often claim ignorance on questions of meaning or dismiss it completely. Inventors tend to have a hard time figuring out the best use for their inventions.
Regarding Jordan's comment on being smart vs. pretending to be smart, I suggest a Turing Test. If it's impossible to detect whether a person is smart or just pretending to be smart, then it does not matter.
And academia is far from sheltered from the capitalist ideal. In fact, American universities everywhere are being systematically destroyed by the prevailing consumer-oriented society. Students are demanding plug-and-play "knowledge modules" in return for their dollars so they may increase their earning potential. And universities are bending over backwards to give those students what they want.
Disinterest in Academic Discourse
>I'm a little unsure about "There are creators and those that make meaning from creations." Is it meant to be a put-down?
No, not at all. I don't mean that to be a statement about either side. My point is that both are often necessary and aren't usually the same person.
Yeah, fun discourse. :)
Disinterest in Academic Discourse
> If it's impossible to detect whether a person is smart or just pretending to be smart, then it does not matter.
The Turing test has everything to do with sentience and little to do with intelligence. I think it is misused in this context.
The difficulty with academics is that we pay them to be smart under the assumption that they provide us some value in return. So I guess the real purpose I'm after in academia is value, not intelligence.
> Students are demanding plug-and-play "knowledge modules" in return for their dollars so they may increase their earning potential.
I think this is true for the MBA/Law/Med; but from what I gather, most students get a degree in information science for networking and personal growth. The dollar value proposition for a PhD in information science doesn't particularly pan out; trust me, I've checked =o)