Re:Phenomenal consciousness is alien to us: SETI and the Fer...
by shermantanktop on Sunday October 20, 2024 @06:46PM
(#41899105)
Excessive use of opaque jargon is typical of wannabes trying to climb a ladder of authority and credibility. But jargon is also a useful tool for competent people within a discipline. Very hard to tell the difference between the two from outside.
I read the comment as linking non-prestigious universities with the first case.
I personally do not have the same faith in prestigious institutions that OP has.
Re:Phenomenal consciousness is alien to us: SETI and the Fer...
by karmakurtisaani on Monday October 21, 2024 @08:17AM
(#41903333)
> Have you ever actually written a research paper? Some things are impossible to flesh out without jargon.
I have, yes. I have gotten some compliments from reviewers for clarity as well, if that's worth anything.
As pointed out already by others, some jargon is necessary, and using difficult language can be seen as a way to prop up credibility.
As a personal anecdote, I've known someone (from an unknown institute) who deliberately didn't want to make his results sound as simple and accessible as they could have been. However, most top people whose papers I've read are written with clarity and unnecessary jargon.
E.g., a musicologist once wrote a paper disproving a previous paper that claimed to show similarities between the proportions of sections in a musical piece and the proportions of architectural sections of a basilica.
How the hell are you going to discuss those measurements and proportions without using the jargon from both Renaissance music and architecture?
Furthermore, what does the necessity of that jargon have to do with the "prestige" of the university of either scholar?
Edit: take down the temperature by changing the word "fuck" to "hell" :)