Ha, I dunno if I'd enjoy reading this book, but I enjoyed learning about it from this post.
I dunno, man, if I think a group has a perspective worth hearing, I think it's worth actually engaging with it, and treating their ideas with rigor? Like, obviously don't be douchey about it; dismissing someone else's knowledge just because it doesn't 1:1 match the processes/methods/etc that you're familiar with totally sucks, as the past couple hundred years of history will tell us... but I think not even bothering to engage because you're worried about doing anything more adventurous than "you are valid" is an even bigger dismissal?
This is something that always bugs me - you can even miss valuable truths by forgoing rigor as if that's doing the perspective a favor. Similar to your point about the econ guys analysis, I find it frustrating when people get mad at those "water is wet" studies.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2022-02-05 05:29 pm (UTC)I dunno, man, if I think a group has a perspective worth hearing, I think it's worth actually engaging with it, and treating their ideas with rigor? Like, obviously don't be douchey about it; dismissing someone else's knowledge just because it doesn't 1:1 match the processes/methods/etc that you're familiar with totally sucks, as the past couple hundred years of history will tell us... but I think not even bothering to engage because you're worried about doing anything more adventurous than "you are valid" is an even bigger dismissal?
This is something that always bugs me - you can even miss valuable truths by forgoing rigor as if that's doing the perspective a favor. Similar to your point about the econ guys analysis, I find it frustrating when people get mad at those "water is wet" studies.