An Example of Pseudo-Academic

常有人提起所謂的假學術,到底那是甚麼意思呢?

Mabbett提供了一個假想的文章,用來說明那種無謂挑戰某些權威專家的看法的例子,乍看起來好像很學術,事實不然。讀起來很有趣。

Acton alleges that William the Conqueror invaded England in 1066. This may well be true, but he does not give any footnote for it and I have been unable to make any independent assessment of his evidence. It is true that some other historians such as Smith (footnote) and Jones (footnote) mention the same thing, but it may be significant that they were writing later than Acton, and were perhaps uncritically repeating what Acton had said. We need to take into account the possibility that Acton was biased. Perhaps his family was of partly Norman descent. At all events, we should not accept claims like this without better evidence than he has given us. [Footnote can be imagined.] I.W. Mabbett, Writing History Essays: A Student’s Guide (Palgrave Macmillan, 2006), 45.

以上這段落,有趣的是口吻、語氣、文字完全模仿了所謂一般學術討論風格,但卻在一個自己沒有新證據,也無法真找出自己挑難之對象之證據之「確實」問題何在的情況之下,大言對方論述有問題。
廣告

發表迴響

在下方填入你的資料或按右方圖示以社群網站登入:

WordPress.com Logo

您的留言將使用 WordPress.com 帳號。 登出 / 變更 )

Twitter picture

您的留言將使用 Twitter 帳號。 登出 / 變更 )

Facebook照片

您的留言將使用 Facebook 帳號。 登出 / 變更 )

Google+ photo

您的留言將使用 Google+ 帳號。 登出 / 變更 )

連結到 %s