 |
 |
On 2 July 2010 11:37, Jesper Aagaard Petersen <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Dave (and others), > > well said! Although I would call work academic based on communicative > merits, not methodology or intention, I definitely agree that it has nothing > to do with location, labels or buildings. When it comes to > education, degrees and titles, I am a little more ambivalent. On the one > hand, we shouldn't exclude people solely on the basis of lacking these > elements; on the other, they have something to say. > > I mean, some of the students I teach (the lazy ones) have absolutely nothing > to back up any titles they eventually get, even though they attended > university. On the other hand, the passionate "amateur" (as in lover of the > subject) probably knows more than me, even without professional > schooling. Nevertheless, when marking and grading papers I see a development > in reflection and construction of arguments in the good students that is > ideally what a degree or title is about, again reflected in the good article > or monograph. To read a book or think critically is not exclusively > academic; but it is one of the ways to read and think. Regarding the > unaffiliated, they are probably unlucky and could do the job as well as the > tenured staff (or they chose to be independent). > > Oh, and when I was spreading a diluted meme earlier on mostly useless work, > I was talking about the university sector as a whole, not > esotericism/magic/religious studies. this takes me back to something Ted said about non-academic (sic) writers providing useful texts and the need for more. Fact is I know how to write an *essay*: premiss, argument, summary and conclusion. Writing a book is a whole different matter, whether aimed at academics or not. The structural methods I have engaged in this respect are probably not what is expected, and are unlikely to become so - in fact probably less with the next title than the previous one! Serious, non-pop and based on solid research, but employing very different devices than a formal study from an academic. Depending on the subject matter and the intention, this is probably inevitable for many 'serious' occultists. This shouldn't be an obstacle for academics since of course primary sources don't generally follow the guidelines either. ;) Jake http://www.underworld-apothecary.com/