4 ms·
> Their writing is filled with generalities about the work and/or author; very few have the training or discipline to talk specifically about the work and to ex
by tkahn6 15y ago
> Their writing is filled with generalities about the work and/or author; very few have the training or discipline to talk specifically about the work and to examine particular sentences.
It's easier to bullshit and fluff your paper with generalities than it is with concrete arguments. It also requires less critical thought. Gotta get that word count up. This is a tactic students use on purpose.
- Drbble 15y agoHuh? Spamming details requires no critical thought and puffs word count. A tight logical argument can suffer from low word count. Generalities replace details when the writer doesn't know details, regardless of critical thinking.
- tkahn6 15y agoIt's also easy to throw down tropes that are so general that they have a good chance of applying to the point you're supposed to be making, no critical thought required. Like this example given by pg in http://ycombinator.com/howtoapply.html http://ycombinator.com/howtoapply.html "Information is the lifeblood of the modern organization. The ability to channel information quickly and efficiently to those who need it is critical to a company's success. A company that achieves an edge in the efficient use of information will, all other things being equal, have a significant edge over competitors."
- dkarl 15y agoStudents rephrase the sources they copy from to avoid getting busted for plagiarism. Rephrasing details you don't understand is risky because you might change their meaning to something factually incorrect. Generalities that don't say much to begin with are easier to paraphrase without running the risk of saying something original, and if you do accidentally say something original, it's less likely to be obviously wrong.