hi teena,
haven't heard from you for a while and share your preoccupation with other things.
i wanted to respond to your comment on conversational exchanges. i think impoliteness and insults are easier to make if one is only known by first name and an email address. if contributors would identify themselves by saying who they are, what they are doing with their backgrounds, and what their agendas are, maybe this would encourage more respectful exchanges
best wishes
klaus
-----Original Message-----
From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Teena Clerke
Sent: Sunday, May 31, 2015 12:55 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Respect
Hi Frankie,
thank you for your post. What is considered ‘frank’ however, is dependent on who is speaking, who is listening and who responds. Conversational exchanges (on or off list, face to face etc) are not neutral – they are imbued with power relations and emotions.
I argue we need to be mindful rather than ‘over cautious’ or ‘over polite’. Not all on the list have a PhD and not all with PhDs go through a viva. And the viva is a great example of the adversary method of which Mouton critiques as a gendered practice (see my previous post). As a practice, it needs to be continually reproduced, which also means it is capable of being disrupted. Mindfulness may be helpful here.
all the best,
teena
> To me (a word cautiously added after reading Cristiano's message), there is a difference between being frank and being disrespectful. Personally (ditto), I do not think we need to be over cautious in fine-tuning words in a debate, however direct and forthright, so long as we are not attacking a person per se for nothing (but even that happens at times, more so in political debate, but that's different and with an obvious intent), we are prepared for it. Some may like to call such caution respect, courtesy, consideration, etc., but stretching it too far could be hypocritical and patronising, and personally (ditto), I see no reason to be over-polite in a debate when and where points and logic are more important than whether it is presented courteously and pleasant to listen to. I suppose most of us have a PhD, and we have gone though the ordeal of viva, of which some could be very harsh. Academic debate, and to me, most debates, should be frank, ie, delivered with the appropriate degree and type of emotion. Merit could be given in a debate even to this very aspect of emotional expression. I cannot agree more that different people have different personalities, styles of expression, etc. If we cannot accommodate that little difference and demand everyone here for a standard mode of pleasant expression over the substance delivered, we may as well go back home to write our poems instead.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|