On Apr 7, 2013, at 9:50 AM, Jonathan Bishop <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>> My
>>> proof reader insists one using "it is thought" to express my own
>>> opinions, whereas others say it is find to use the 'I' pronoun.
>>
>> Why would they want something less precise (and arguably more pretentious)?
>>
>>
>
> Probably because they know that the reflexive approach to research is
> still vehemently challenged by
> materialist/positivist/empiricist/objectivist traditionalists? :-)
If positivism means Truth = murky fiat, maybe but this sounds like scientistic phony positivism. If you want obnoxious and pretentious but still more precise, go for "this writer thought."
I don't buy into all of the anti-passive voice rhetoric (I find Strunk and White to be deeply flawed and many of their cult-like adherents more than a bit depressing) but it is thought that something having been said that is meant might be rated in a positive manner, albeit perhaps not a positivist one.
Gunnar
Gunnar Swanson
East Carolina University
graphic design program
http://www.ecu.edu/cs-cfac/soad/graphic/index.cfm
[log in to unmask]
Gunnar Swanson Design Office
1901 East 6th Street
Greenville NC 27858
USA
http://www.gunnarswanson.com
[log in to unmask]
+1 252 258-7006
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|