Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

What is the Point? The Level of Discourse on A.E.

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Akolouthos View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 24-Feb-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2091
  Quote Akolouthos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: What is the Point? The Level of Discourse on A.E.
    Posted: 13-Nov-2008 at 16:51
So I've been mulling over a question lately. What is the point of discussion here (specifically on this subforum, but also on the wider forum)? What function does it serve? What is the difference between scholarly dialogue and practical application. A bit of context:
 
In the academic world, issues tend to be discussed at length and discussions often delve deeply into specifics. Experts tackle very precise questions within a specific yet complete context. In this way, issues are treated with the breadth and depth they deserve, and while the discussions are often diffficult for the uninitiated to grasp, they do at least provide an honest -- sometimes brutally so -- and full analysis of topics. In this way -- not always, I grant, but often -- those who desire simply to defend a position without seeking to examine an issue or controversy for its own sake are weeded out. Occasionally -- though there are fewer and fewer of them as fields have grown to demand more specific knowledge -- there are those rare polymaths (who are quite often polyglots as well, although this is not necessarily a requirement). Really, gcle and a few others on the forum are the only ones who come close to meeting the criteria -- and I mean no offense; note that I did not include myself either, for good reason. This is not the norm, however. Most of us simply don't have the background to tackle issues outside of our subject fields, and are still developing our skills even within our own areas of study.
 
Anyway, the bottom line is that in the academic world, at least in an ideal sense, the goal is knowledge for the sake of knowledge. Conclusions wait on analysis, and sources are used to help form these conclusions. Practical application must wait until after an analysis is complete. The goal is to take all of the building materials, examine them, and try to come up with a blueprint of the complete structure into which they will all fit. Often this structure, while imposing, is not particularly sound, which is why the next strong breeze of scholarship damages and sometimes destroys what has been built. In essence there is a natural corrrective that takes place in a field that is constantly in flux. Ideological mansions are intentionally built on sand, with the awareness that they will be demolished as soon as a strong wind comes along and a seemingly better structure can be built.
 
Within the context of what I will call, for lack of a better term, popular apologetics (historical, theological, philosophical, etc.), we see a goal which is quite different: the winning of hearts and minds, the discrediting of certain positions, etc. Basically people often seek out their sources to verify a conclusion they have already reached. My own field is rife with controversy which is based on a shoddy or incomplete understanding/use of scholarly work. In a subforum that deals with ideology, this happens quite often. Practical concerns outweigh analysis, and preconceived conclusions are the lenses through which sources are examined and either accepted, discarded, or explained away. To use the above analogy, the goal is to use only those building materials that one can use to create a specific structure for which one already has a blueprint. The lumber and stones that won't fit into the blueprint are either simply ignored or inadequately explained away. The resulting hut seems a good deal more sound than the mansion mentioned above, but it simply isn't as complete or fulfilling. Furthermore, it is intentionally set on a foundation of false stone, which renders it largely immune to scholarly winds that, by all rights, should carry it away. Certainly one could assail the position, but the arguments used would profit neither the architect -- owing to his or her conviction, which is proof against analysis-- nor the listeners, who, possessing an incomplete knowledge themselves, will always seek simplicity of presentation over thorough, and often tedious, examination.
 
I suppose it all comes down to intellectual honesty. If two or more people are willing to discuss an issue for its own sake, then they may hope to derive something thereby. If even one of them is content to seek simple, incomplete answers, and view all of the data strictly through the lense of his or her own bias then the whole house of cards comes crumbling down. Recall that Socrates was only willing to discuss things with particular kinds of people, precisely because those who were unwilling to be open to self-examination and intellectual honesty would derive no benefit from speaking with him. We are all subject to our own particular biases, but so long as we do not put a defense of them at the fore of our concerns, we might yet salvage some sort of productive dialogue. Unfortunately we, all too often, view ourselves as defenders of our own views -- like advocates in a court of law, or the small minded architect mentioned above -- rather than as investigators -- like architects who are shown a piece of ground, a set of building materials, and told to make something of them. And even when we do not do so from the outset, the temptation to fall back on simple yet inadequate explanations is great when the data is not to our liking.
 
I have certainly, at one time or another, fit the latter profile -- specifically in my early days on the forum. I doubt that there is one of us who hasn't at one point or another. It is simply so much easier in this format, where the vast majority of us possess an inadequate understanding of most of the topics discussed. I also may have idealized the academic world a bit; there are certainly those who cast sophistic aspersions from ivory towers built gradually over a career of more honest work -- establishment and respect breeds laziness and contempt. Those who seek to do so from the beginning, however, are often weeded out. While I do have the same concerns about dialogue in the real world, the forum format lends itself much more to the type of sophistry mentioned above.
 
Anyway, I'd be interested to hear a variety of opinions on the following question: What, precisely, are we doing here? What is the point?
 
-Akolouthos
Back to Top
Parnell View Drop Down
Suspended
Suspended

Suspended

Joined: 04-Apr-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1409
  Quote Parnell Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Nov-2008 at 18:46
I wouldn't apply any academic reason for being here. People interested in history congregate and talk. Its like a pub more than anything :-)
Back to Top
Akolouthos View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 24-Feb-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2091
  Quote Akolouthos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Nov-2008 at 18:53
Originally posted by Parnell

I wouldn't apply any academic reason for being here. People interested in history congregate and talk. Its like a pub more than anything :-)
 
An interesting analysis, and, I think, a fairly accurate one. Would you say, then, that any learning that takes place here is more a result of an osmotic process than anything? And if so, how does this differ from a uni or any other form of participation in scholarly research?
 
-Akolouthos
Back to Top
hugoestr View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Suspended

Joined: 13-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3987
  Quote hugoestr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Nov-2008 at 19:05
A pub sounds correct. Once in a while you can have a scholarly discussion, but many of those have to me planned for them to happen. You pointed out the main problem: when someone presents a well thought out piece, most of us don't have anything else to add to it.

On the other hand, the one thing that AE does well is present different historical perspectives on common narratives. I know that I have learned a lot from having gcle and bey pointing out deficiencies in my historical narratives, and I am thankful to both of them for that.
Back to Top
Seko View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
Spammer

Joined: 01-Sep-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8595
  Quote Seko Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Nov-2008 at 19:26
I've joined these discussions so that one day I could create a thread dedicated to the battle of avatars. Mu ha haCool.
 
In all actuality and utmost seriousness I enjoy these discussions simply for the depth of immense info, and for the intense debates, and for getting into peoples' faces, wait a minute, and to research stuff. Nope that ain't it. To... to... to learn something I never would have dreamed of looking up. But most of all to hang out with a fun motley crew like rest of you . Thumbs%20Up
 
 
Back to Top
Parnell View Drop Down
Suspended
Suspended

Suspended

Joined: 04-Apr-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1409
  Quote Parnell Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Nov-2008 at 19:48
The things I'm interested in (Namely, the Irish wars of independence) are rarely if ever discussed here, so I rarely add much on the side of 'scholarly learning' to discussions here. I am interested in a number of other things, but not as well learnt as I'd like to be. While is why my posts tend to be generalities rather than scholarly specifics. Which is a bad habit :-)

People like GCLE add to the scope of the place. You pick up things here.
Back to Top
Omar al Hashim View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5697
  Quote Omar al Hashim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Nov-2008 at 06:53
Aye, I agree this is much more like a pub. Although its a pub with many very intelligent people. Although when a scholarly post is presented - like the one above - I find there is often little to add. So scholarly discussions finish very quickly in consensus.
I actually learn a hell of a lot here, through testing out theorys, diffusion from others, and open conflict. As it is very unlikely on AE that any one will ever admit defeat in a conflict - we all are pretty well set in our ways, the primary and only purpose of having them is to increase your own knowledge.
Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 22-Jan-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4221
  Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Nov-2008 at 22:47
There are many students here who get enough academics in their lives.  This is more like the college "bull session" with your friends (friends? Smile ) where you can argue about everything and forget about it the next day.
 
A stress buster without sex.  (Did I say that?)
 
If you want an academic exercise, write an article for the magazine.  For us older guys, it is a way to justify our mis-spent university major.  Big%20smile
 
 


Edited by pikeshot1600 - 14-Nov-2008 at 22:49
Back to Top
Akolouthos View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 24-Feb-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2091
  Quote Akolouthos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Nov-2008 at 23:54
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim

Aye, I agree this is much more like a pub. Although its a pub with many very intelligent people. Although when a scholarly post is presented - like the one above - I find there is often little to add. So scholarly discussions finish very quickly in consensus.
I actually learn a hell of a lot here, through testing out theorys, diffusion from others, and open conflict. As it is very unlikely on AE that any one will ever admit defeat in a conflict - we all are pretty well set in our ways, the primary and only purpose of having them is to increase your own knowledge.
 
You know, I've never really thought of it like that before. I think I like the pub metaphor everyone has settled on. Smile
 
-Akolouthos
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035
  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Nov-2008 at 15:36
I might vary the pub metaphor to a sidewalk cafe somewhere in the Vth arrondissement.
 
Does anyone else recall the OJ Bar and Grill and its regulars as immortalised by Donald E. Westlake in the series of books about John Dortmunder?
 
"John Dortmunder was a man on whom the sun shone only when he needed darkness." 


Edited by gcle2003 - 15-Nov-2008 at 15:37
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor

Suspended

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
  Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Nov-2008 at 15:55
Discourse is authoritative debate or other kind of personal expression in this context - authoritative meaning substantiated - backed up, referenced. etc.  Am I on the same page?
Back to Top
Akolouthos View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 24-Feb-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2091
  Quote Akolouthos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Nov-2008 at 09:43
Originally posted by Zagros

Discourse is authoritative debate or other kind of personal expression in this context - authoritative meaning substantiated - backed up, referenced. etc.  Am I on the same page?
 
I think so. At least that's how I understand it. So I guess we'd have to draw a distinction between simple arguments and rational discourse (i.e. "I'm right, you're wrong" vs. "The following sources support a conclusion that I am wont to draw, and discredit alternate theories"). So then do we have three types of conversations going on on AE (those being 1) simple "pub talk"; 2) arguments; and 3) reasoned discourse)?
 
-Akolouthos
Back to Top
Omar al Hashim View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5697
  Quote Omar al Hashim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Nov-2008 at 10:12
When one attempts to debate with an argumentative agenda pusher through the use of reasoned discourse, while he will never convince the agenda pusher, he will increase he own knowledge immensely
Back to Top
Akolouthos View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 24-Feb-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2091
  Quote Akolouthos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Nov-2008 at 10:55
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim

When one attempts to debate with an argumentative agenda pusher through the use of reasoned discourse, while he will never convince the agenda pusher, he will increase he own knowledge immensely
 
Aye, but sometimes it becomes tiresome and leads to apathy. Another complication: generally people feel that they are the ones attempting reasoned discourse, while the other guy is the one who is an argumentative agenda pusher. Wink
 
-Akolouthos
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035
  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Nov-2008 at 11:24
Originally posted by Akolouthos

So then do we have three types of conversations going on on AE (those being 1) simple "pub talk"; 2) arguments; and 3) reasoned discourse)?
 
-Akolouthos
 
1) 'Discussion' 2) 'dispute' 3) 'debate' ?
Back to Top
Akolouthos View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 24-Feb-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2091
  Quote Akolouthos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Nov-2008 at 22:53
Originally posted by gcle2003

Originally posted by Akolouthos

So then do we have three types of conversations going on on AE (those being 1) simple "pub talk"; 2) arguments; and 3) reasoned discourse)?
 
-Akolouthos
 
1) 'Discussion' 2) 'dispute' 3) 'debate' ?
 
I like it. Smile
 
-Akolouthos
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Nov-2008 at 23:11
I believe we all have here to share information, and to discuss friendly -most of the times.
I have learned quite a bit about the most varied issues just talking about them on the forum. It is amazing that if one get interesting about China past or Australian aborigins, for example, there is always a Chinese or Australian person to answer our questions.
 
So, what could be better than being in an international "college" where to learn and teach without frontiers?
Back to Top
Jams View Drop Down
Consul
Consul

Suspended

Joined: 06-Sep-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 365
  Quote Jams Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Nov-2008 at 23:37
I agree with Pinguin. And also on the pub comment.
There's a lot of info here, and sometimes people for other places have some info you wouldn't chance upon youself.
Back to Top
red clay View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
Tomato Master Emeritus

Joined: 14-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 10226
  Quote red clay Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Nov-2008 at 00:42
Originally posted by Jams

I agree with Pinguin. And also on the pub comment.
There's a lot of info here, and sometimes people for other places have some info you wouldn't chance upon youself.
 
Hmmm, and I agree with both of you.  This is serious.  We have to be very careful.  The last time an alignment like this occurred there was a Polar Shift.
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                        Big%20smile


Edited by red clay - 24-Nov-2008 at 00:45
"Arguing with someone who hates you or your ideas, is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter what move you make, your opponent will walk all over the board and scramble the pieces".
Unknown.
Back to Top
opuslola View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
suspended

Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4620
  Quote opuslola Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Dec-2009 at 08:50
Akolouthos! While I doubt if you will ever read these words, I shall write them anyway if not for the benefit (if any) that Red Clay obtain!

Your post was intellectually exciting! It certainly made me look closely at the manner in which I sometimes use, when either defending a position or taking a position in the first place. I feel it is mostly "ego" that drives me, and some of the other posters on both this site and on other sites as well.
I even suppose that I might well consider myself as a master of rhetoric?, but that could not really be true since I am not really a "master" of anything or any point!
At the best, I might really consider myself as a "generalist!" That is I have never been able to really take any subject, and narrow my thinking to acheive mastery of it! Instead I tend to find "tidbits" of information that make me want to find out a little more! Thus I tend to meander like a river, making small bends here and there, willy-nilly, and never reaching the delta itself!

So, again thanks for the thoughtful and thought provoking post!

Regards,
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.