Scholars, trust nothing!
August 24th, 2010 by Sara
Over the course of my University career, (which is continuing into an MA as of October…I obviously don’t know when to quit), critical analysis has been the key to getting a high grade. When reading something – whether a piece of fiction or not – we students are always encouraged to look at the text from different angles. This is all very well and good – and incredibly interesting – when having to work on something academic…but over the past few weeks as I’ve attempted to read for leisure, I find myself coming to a horrific realisation.
…I can’t find my critical analysis ‘off’ switch.
In terms of fiction, I can more or less ignore the little voice in the back of my head murmuring appreciatively (or not) about postmodern styles, imagery and prosopopoeia (yeah, I know long words). It’s when I come to non-fiction books that I cannot seem to ignore the fact that I’m simply unable to trust something at face value. Even dictionaries – yes, you heard me dear reader. Those tomes of knowledge make me raise an eyebrow if they happen to have word etymology in. The origins of words and phrases are something I never trust anyone else to now tell me…unless the book in question has a very good bibliography at the back.
In one way, this curious need to double check facts is good. It means that I’m less apt to believe everything I read in Newspapers for example. The suspicion does get tiresome on occasion however, as I once more decide to turn on the laptop and cross check something I’ve just read. Consider it a double-edged sword, if you will…but I can’t help feeling that when the time comes that I just sit and murmur “oh, that’s nice”, accepting something I’ve just read without challenging it…it’ll be the first thing that’s incorrect and the first thing I get pulled up on should it come up in conversation with my academic friends.
Having done with my own mild guilt however, surely in most respects, the onus should be on the writer of the said book to ensure that their facts are…well…factual? There’s a saying I heard not long ago, which went along the lines of “Books: the original Google”, and it highlights rather well the general attitude to finding information. “I’ll just Google it, it’s easier” is a thought process which – even now – I’m guilty of far more often than I care to admit. It’s certainly a mindset which is shared by – I would heartily argue – most people. Why reach for a dictionary (as flawed as they may be) when you can tap a word into ‘Google define’? With information (correct or flawed) so readily available at the click of a few buttons, why should writers and editors of good old fashioned encyclopaedias and other such books put in as much effort? Indeed, why don’t they simply collate information they find on the first page of Google after typing in their project idea?
It is this sort of thought process which creates the little, cynical voice in the back of my mind, telling me to cross reference everything. It seems to be so disgraceful for an academic to be misinformed. The crux of the matter – after having discussed a few reasonings and quirks behind this particular habit of mine – is whether the ‘trust nothing!’ mantra is a good thing or not.
I’m going to try really hard here not to sit on the fence as I tend to always do…so I guess my personal answer to the question would be “Yes, it IS a good thing”. Not only because it means I have a mind of my own, capable of critical thought, it also indicates a curiosity in some ways. I’m not content with taking things for granted. I care about these things enough to ‘make sure’, as it were. Questioning what may be taken for the norm is how new theories and new perspectives are drawn up, serving only to enhance the academic sphere…and who could argue with that?
No related posts.
I feel your pain.
Having gone through Wikipedia information and found flawed research, personal opinion and incorrect information, it does not surprise me that “Googling” a word will return several incorrect definitions as well as correct ones. The online dictionaries that have sprung up are lacking in attributions. Even the “name” ones don’t seem to be doing a good job. But then again, the print dictionaries have been known to be incorrect.
And yes, I also have the same issue – turning off my “critical analysis” switch… lol. I still read a book as though I am going to review it, and now I also find myself seeing typos, spelling errors, grammar mistakes and more. All the product of two English composition classes and one research class in collage these past three years.
Sad that the web has not only the best information but also the worst to offer.