Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy
ace--you seem to imagine that you can load up questions with dubious logic and/or assumptions as if there are no problems with that and when they're pointed out to you, you get all sniffly about it.
|
I think if you applied your critique of me consistently you would have some credibility with me.
Quote:
|
if you want to know how it is that ideological biases can be teased out of the ways in which infotainment is framed/presented, there are any number of approaches you can take, and it only requires a bit of research to start finding out what they are.
|
Or, I can ask directly.
Quote:
|
and there are debatable point in alot of the methodologies--like discourse analysis, say, which would define a set of categories as conservative-speak (for example) and then simply count the occurances across a given sample of infotainments--with that there are some problems (the definition of conservative-speak can be one, but that's usually resolved by taking some care with the building, making arguments for the classifications or interepretations)---there's problems of representativeness (which are typically addressed in the methodology section of a study, but one can argue about that)---and sometimes there are problems of overall interpretation (on the order of well these regularities look interesting and seem to say something, but what functionally do they mean? do people modulate their actions as a function of the frequency with which certain terms are repeated?---but this typically comes down to what is being explained or understood through the study, and within that usually comes to versions of the teleological fallacy--what you're looking to explain selects the elements of analysis for you in a way)....
|
What?
Quote:
|
i say all this because there are approaches to actual research that try to isolate political meanings and/or questions and they're not without problems necessarily---but they're actual projects and not questions pulled out from beneath your hat.
|
You are far to theoretical for me. My brain is beneath my hat (make your jokes, etc., ha, ha, ha) and what gets pulled out is what is really there. Do you assume my questions are not real? Do you believe there is some agenda behind every question or post? Why does everything have to be made so complicated with you? What are you pretending to be and why? Is the true sign of intellect to make the simple complex or the complex simple? Did that last question offend you, why?
I think you would make an interesting character study. Have you ever taken an objective look at what you do and why?
Quote:
|
and there's a TON of such research generated all the time and a simple web-search would no doubt run you into some of it.
|
How do you know I am not doing research? Do you hold the position that because "research" exists that no further "research" is needed? Do you want to re-think what you are really suggesting here? Do you even understand the implication of what you wrote here, or is this furthering the notion (that prompted this exchange) that you or people who hold your views are more informed or intellectually more capable than the masses?
Quote:
|
so my "value-added" (god i hate that expression) was to point out, in a relatively nice way i might add, that your questions were so badly framed as to be kinda useless.
|
There are two way to look at badly framed questions. One is to seek a better understanding of the questions. The other is to dismiss the questions. The former adds value, the later does not. If you get "jollies" from sitting on high and taking jabs at all the "inferior" folk with their poorly framed questions, poorly framed post, poorly structured logic, etc., you must be a very happy person. You do it well, but understand that it moves nothing forward, it adds nothing, it has no value. I repeatedly suggest that you take another approach with me or ignore me. Primarily, I don't accept that I am inferior to you in the ways outlined above. I don't accept the notion that honest questions can be "poorly framed". I don't accept the notion that I will let someone take "pot shots" at me without responding. So, you are in a no win situation given your approach. So, if you do decide upon a little self-reflection, the first question is how long will you do the same thing over and over and get the same result. I know what I am doing and I know why, do you?
Quote:
|
but there are other versions of such questions that might be interesting--but you'd have to do a little work to get to them.
|
In the end are you saying the questions are what they are? Are not versions of the same question have a commonality of an unanswered underlying question? Again, do you even know what you suggest here? Or, are you simply like the six year-old kid, who has to have the game played by his rules or he takes his ball and goes home? "I'm not going to answer you question, unless you ask it the way I want you to!" That is real mature, isn't it?