3 ms·

> a special right, advantage, or immunity granted or available only to a particular person or group. The Google definition is the same definition that academic

> a special right, advantage, or immunity granted or available only to a particular person or group. The Google definition is the same definition that academics use. Exactly the same. The sibling you references is correct - "privilege already had widely used emotional connotations that made it an insult to call someone privileged." but it's not academics that implied that meaning onto it. Also, can we have a discussion about these academic concepts without immediately ascribing "political goals"? We're talking about specific sociological concepts. Can we stick to that instead of ascribing subjective "goals" to people's research or ideas?

edbob 6y ago
I'm trying to find a way to give a meaningful reply, but I honestly get stuck on this part about academia's supposed neutrality. I don't believe for a second that sociologists are somehow blissfully unaware of the way their work is used to shape policy, to shape debate, and even to shape the language itself, nor that they are somehow angels who can't have impure motives. In addition, it's common knowledge that petty political in-fighting is the rule in academia. There's no reason at all to think that academics are neutral in any way, but plenty of reasons not to.
- deanCommie 6y ago
  Does the work of open source maintainers and technologists shape policy, debate, and language itself? By some definition no one is truly neutral. Everyone has some ideas and motives, and goals. The problem is when technologists look at those in the humanities and ascribe THEIR goals as "impure" or "political", and therefore somehow a class worthy of derision and dismissal. Don't you see that?
  - edbob 6y ago
    I think it's a different situation because no one is citing open-source maintainers in their studies, and they have very little influence in policy. I do see your point about everyone having bias, and it's not fair to stereotype one group as being especially biased. I apologize for showing undue bias myself.
    - edbob 6y ago
      Scott Alexander just posted a very interesting article[0] with a section "2. War On Experts" that covers some of the issues that I was so poorly trying to communicate. His take is probably more harsh than I would want to adopt, but he is deliberately addressing Republicans here so maybe his tone is different for that reason. [0] https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/a-modest-proposal-for-republicans https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/a-modest-proposal-for-...

edbob 6y ago

I'm trying to find a way to give a meaningful reply, but I honestly get stuck on this part about academia's supposed neutrality. I don't believe for a second that sociologists are somehow blissfully unaware of the way their work is used to shape policy, to shape debate, and even to shape the language itself, nor that they are somehow angels who can't have impure motives. In addition, it's common knowledge that petty political in-fighting is the rule in academia. There's no reason at all to think that academics are neutral in any way, but plenty of reasons not to.

deanCommie 6y ago
Does the work of open source maintainers and technologists shape policy, debate, and language itself? By some definition no one is truly neutral. Everyone has some ideas and motives, and goals. The problem is when technologists look at those in the humanities and ascribe THEIR goals as "impure" or "political", and therefore somehow a class worthy of derision and dismissal. Don't you see that?
- edbob 6y ago
  I think it's a different situation because no one is citing open-source maintainers in their studies, and they have very little influence in policy. I do see your point about everyone having bias, and it's not fair to stereotype one group as being especially biased. I apologize for showing undue bias myself.
  - edbob 6y ago
    Scott Alexander just posted a very interesting article[0] with a section "2. War On Experts" that covers some of the issues that I was so poorly trying to communicate. His take is probably more harsh than I would want to adopt, but he is deliberately addressing Republicans here so maybe his tone is different for that reason. [0] https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/a-modest-proposal-for-republicans https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/a-modest-proposal-for-...