3 ms·
NY Times articles usually fall into one of three categories for me: 1. good, 2. closed-minded liberal that thinks he/she is open minded but really hates Republi
by devmonk 16y ago
NY Times articles usually fall into one of three categories for me: 1. good, 2. closed-minded liberal that thinks he/she is open minded but really hates Republicans and everything they stand for, and 3. pompously intellectual. This fell into the latter category. I should've known this when the writer wrote naive as "naïve".
Thanks for sharing. I love literature.
- Jun8 16y agoI'm sorry to say, that is so off, "it's not even wrong" as they say. Prof. Pippin's piece is against pompous intellectualism that is currently reigning supreme in English Departments. I suggest you read about the Sokal Affair referenced in the essay (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokal_affair http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokal_affair) and, if you're interested, take it it from there. The correct was to spell is "naïve", BTW. Open a MS Word document and type "naive". It will correct it to the above form. Now, MS is pompous but I don't think it is in general intellectually pompous :-) Here's a discussion about the topic: http://echochamber.me/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=61217 http://echochamber.me/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=61217. Here's the link to the ultimate authority on the subject, The Chicago Manual of Style: http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/access/intercept.epl?path=/15/ch05/ch05_sec202.html http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/access/intercept.epl?pat..., alas it's not free.