5 ms·

Another related academic field that has this quirk is musicology. You can have a successful career writing books and papers on musicology without needing to k

Another related academic field that has this quirk is musicology. You can have a successful career writing books and papers on musicology without needing to know how to play or write music. To me it feels analogous to an academic who writes on history of math without being able to prove or understand theorems.

Ansil849 5y ago
> To me it feels analogous to an academic who writes on history of math without being able to prove or understand theorems. You're suggesting that in order to study the history of something, you also need to be a practitioner of it? So for example, a professor of military history needs to have combat experience? An art history teacher needs to be an artist?
- throwawayarnty 5y ago
  Lecturing on “historical mathematics” without being able to follow a mathematicians papers seems dubious to me. Lecturing on music without being able to play music is also suspicious. I would feel very fake if I were one of those people. You would only be able to use second hand sources where someone with real ability has predigested the original works for you.
  - Ansil849 5y ago
    So to return to my question, would you apply this criteria to all historical courses? That the lecturer must have firsthand practitioner knowledge of the field? How would this work for, say, ancient history?
    - watwut 5y ago
      Can't write about historical crime, unless you killed someone. I don't make the rules.
      - MrYellowP 5y ago
        That's an unfair comparison. He seems to point out the fact that theory and practise are only the same in theory, but never in practise. One can always derive theory from practise, but never the other way round. There is room for doubt when someone lacks the practise to back up his theories. A psychologist, who learned everything about psychology, without ever having actually practised it, is equally skilled as someone with experience. He isn't.
        watwut 5y ago
        Musicology is not about how to create or play music. Music theory is part of it, but so is history, sociology etc. And the comparison does not work even in context of original topic. The article from Beard linked from this blogpost (or blog post itself).
    - throwawayarnty 5y ago
      No, my criteria is whether you can understand the original source without relying on another person with real ability to process the source for you. For example, if you want to write the work of a mathematician but cant read or understand the writings of the mathematician, then I would be uncomfortable with that.
      - watwut 5y ago
        Reading Mary Beard article, the ability to read texts for work was not issue at all. The issue was effective sight reading of complex text you are encountering the first time. She was writing about that being slow.
    - bryanrasmussen 5y ago
      >That the lecturer must have firsthand practitioner knowledge of the field? All other things being equal first hand practical knowledge is then an edge, so not required but a benefit.
    - coldtea 5y ago
      >How would this work for, say, ancient history? In that they should be able to read the ancient languages of the culture they study, for one. Nobody said anything about "firsthand knowledge" in the sense of "having lived in the time of the ancients". But if you insist, sure, a historian that have actually lived at the time, would have a far better understanding of it (all other things being equal, like writing ability and so on). I'd take Thucylides over any modern historian of the Peloponesian war, for example.
- prvc 5y ago
  >You're suggesting that in order to study the history of something, you also need to be a practitioner of it? Your quoted sentence does not imply or suggest this.
  - CRConrad 5y ago
    Yes, that's exactly what it does.
- coldtea 5y ago
  >You're suggesting that in order to study the history of something, you also need to be a practitioner of it? So for example, a professor of military history needs to have combat experience? An art history teacher needs to be an artist? I don't know if the parent is suggesting it, but I surely am. You can do it without being a practitioner, but worse (everything else, like your knowledge of the subject or writing skills, being equal).
  - Ansil849 5y ago
    So....an arson investigator should have a sizable arrest record for arson?
    - coldtea 5y ago
      No - they should know their way around matches and fires, and seen many in action. Including setting up fires themselves, just not illegally. Duh! Practitioner doesn't mean "illegal practictioner". Arson investigators' training (and even practice) includes setting up controlled fires to study how arsonists works or how a specific arson case played out... Does anyone seriously has to put this lame "so to be a professor/investigator of X, one must do X?" (illegal or impossible) question, when the answer is not only obvious ("no, but they should be aquainted with X to the best possible and legal degree") but has been clarified again and again in this thread?
- jhbadger 5y ago
  It depends on how technical a subject is and whether practicing it helps understand it. It's not terribly surprising that most historians of science who cover modern (post WWII) science have at least some science background. You can't meaningful deal with the debates over the nature of the genetic code or particle physics unless you understand the technical issues.
- eru 5y ago
  Well, if you want to be a professor of military history, it certainly helps if you have at least tried handling a sword or gun. Perhaps show up to a few HEMA (Historical European martial arts) classes, if that's close to your area of study. An art history teacher would be well served having tried her hands at using the historical techniques a few times to get a feel for them. But no need for her to be a brilliant artist.
TheOtherHobbes 5y ago
You really can't. Virtually all mainstream academic musicologists read fluently, because the job involves pulling cultural and social metaphors out of (mostly) written music - plus some history and source analysis of music criticism and theory, some philosophy, and other standard academic accessories.
- HPsquared 5y ago
  Parent was talking about the activities other than reading: playing the music, and writing (new) music.
dan-robertson 5y ago
Many historians of mathematics are knowledgeable about mathematics but don’t really know how to practice history, which I think is worse. It leads to lots of bad practices like whiggishness.

Ansil849 5y ago

> To me it feels analogous to an academic who writes on history of math without being able to prove or understand theorems. You're suggesting that in order to study the history of something, you also need to be a practitioner of it? So for example, a professor of military history needs to have combat experience? An art history teacher needs to be an artist?

throwawayarnty 5y ago
Lecturing on “historical mathematics” without being able to follow a mathematicians papers seems dubious to me. Lecturing on music without being able to play music is also suspicious. I would feel very fake if I were one of those people. You would only be able to use second hand sources where someone with real ability has predigested the original works for you.
- Ansil849 5y ago
  So to return to my question, would you apply this criteria to all historical courses? That the lecturer must have firsthand practitioner knowledge of the field? How would this work for, say, ancient history?
  - watwut 5y ago
    Can't write about historical crime, unless you killed someone. I don't make the rules.
    - MrYellowP 5y ago
      That's an unfair comparison. He seems to point out the fact that theory and practise are only the same in theory, but never in practise. One can always derive theory from practise, but never the other way round. There is room for doubt when someone lacks the practise to back up his theories. A psychologist, who learned everything about psychology, without ever having actually practised it, is equally skilled as someone with experience. He isn't.
      - watwut 5y ago
        Musicology is not about how to create or play music. Music theory is part of it, but so is history, sociology etc. And the comparison does not work even in context of original topic. The article from Beard linked from this blogpost (or blog post itself).
  - throwawayarnty 5y ago
    No, my criteria is whether you can understand the original source without relying on another person with real ability to process the source for you. For example, if you want to write the work of a mathematician but cant read or understand the writings of the mathematician, then I would be uncomfortable with that.
    - watwut 5y ago
      Reading Mary Beard article, the ability to read texts for work was not issue at all. The issue was effective sight reading of complex text you are encountering the first time. She was writing about that being slow.
  - bryanrasmussen 5y ago
    >That the lecturer must have firsthand practitioner knowledge of the field? All other things being equal first hand practical knowledge is then an edge, so not required but a benefit.
  - coldtea 5y ago
    >How would this work for, say, ancient history? In that they should be able to read the ancient languages of the culture they study, for one. Nobody said anything about "firsthand knowledge" in the sense of "having lived in the time of the ancients". But if you insist, sure, a historian that have actually lived at the time, would have a far better understanding of it (all other things being equal, like writing ability and so on). I'd take Thucylides over any modern historian of the Peloponesian war, for example.
prvc 5y ago
>You're suggesting that in order to study the history of something, you also need to be a practitioner of it? Your quoted sentence does not imply or suggest this.
- CRConrad 5y ago
  Yes, that's exactly what it does.
coldtea 5y ago
>You're suggesting that in order to study the history of something, you also need to be a practitioner of it? So for example, a professor of military history needs to have combat experience? An art history teacher needs to be an artist? I don't know if the parent is suggesting it, but I surely am. You can do it without being a practitioner, but worse (everything else, like your knowledge of the subject or writing skills, being equal).
- Ansil849 5y ago
  So....an arson investigator should have a sizable arrest record for arson?
  - coldtea 5y ago
    No - they should know their way around matches and fires, and seen many in action. Including setting up fires themselves, just not illegally. Duh! Practitioner doesn't mean "illegal practictioner". Arson investigators' training (and even practice) includes setting up controlled fires to study how arsonists works or how a specific arson case played out... Does anyone seriously has to put this lame "so to be a professor/investigator of X, one must do X?" (illegal or impossible) question, when the answer is not only obvious ("no, but they should be aquainted with X to the best possible and legal degree") but has been clarified again and again in this thread?
jhbadger 5y ago
It depends on how technical a subject is and whether practicing it helps understand it. It's not terribly surprising that most historians of science who cover modern (post WWII) science have at least some science background. You can't meaningful deal with the debates over the nature of the genetic code or particle physics unless you understand the technical issues.
eru 5y ago
Well, if you want to be a professor of military history, it certainly helps if you have at least tried handling a sword or gun. Perhaps show up to a few HEMA (Historical European martial arts) classes, if that's close to your area of study. An art history teacher would be well served having tried her hands at using the historical techniques a few times to get a feel for them. But no need for her to be a brilliant artist.

TheOtherHobbes 5y ago

You really can't. Virtually all mainstream academic musicologists read fluently, because the job involves pulling cultural and social metaphors out of (mostly) written music - plus some history and source analysis of music criticism and theory, some philosophy, and other standard academic accessories.

HPsquared 5y ago
Parent was talking about the activities other than reading: playing the music, and writing (new) music.

dan-robertson 5y ago

Many historians of mathematics are knowledgeable about mathematics but don’t really know how to practice history, which I think is worse. It leads to lots of bad practices like whiggishness.