I could support my arguments with the use of countless quotes from famous individuals. But I think this style of ‘intellectual’ writing is often over indulged leaving readers feeling overwhelmed or intellectually inferior. This style of writing is actively encouraged from an early age. The school trained writing and thinking can include mainly references to what one old man with a beard said a long time ago, which contradicts a way of thinking another old man said some time ago. I do not have a problem with them being old or male or having beards or that they said what they said a long time ago, but that their opinions are held with such high regard and to merely quote them with some minimal critical thinking is considered sufficient for a good argument.
To give you an example I was once reading a paper (can’t remember which one) and a journalist (can’t remember who) was criticising the use of ‘science’ to define how happy we are. The journalist quoted the study done by ‘scientists’ which claimed that we are now happier than we ever have been. He then argued that this conclusion contradicted a study earlier in the year by ‘scientists’ that said we are not as happy as we were ten years ago. The journalist went on to argue that science does not have the answer to everything and that we should not forget what great philosophers have said on the subject of happiness. He then went on to quote Aristotle’s definition of happiness describing it as beautiful…
‘Happiness is the meaning and the purpose of life, the whole aim and end of human existence’ (or some other similar meaningless shit like that).
However, this was just Aristotle’s personal definition of happiness not his opinion of whether or not people today are happy….This journalist thought the use of like minded quotes was enough to support opinion. I cannot get this bug bare of mine across as beautifully as a great man once did when he said 'Never believe what a person is saying just because it is followed by a quote from a great man' and 'Everybody generalises'. That great man is of course me. If you haven’t detected the sarcasm then you must regard me as a hypocritical arrogant idiot. But then again you didn’t even spot the obvious sarcasm so fuck you. The second quote is obviously not at all related to this paragraph but I find it funny so thought I would include it. Such a quote could make me seem either clever or stupid and then I remembered I said it without realising at the time that it was funny (until the friend I said it to laughed) so I therefore must be the latter.
I must confess I don’t normally talk like this. This is my posh writing voice and normally it would sound a bit like this …
‘Aye fucking canny like… Nee botha…Aye whey…Varnigh shit mesell’
Two more reasons why I have not used too many quotes and references to established philosophy and theology is: it requires more work and effort, and my knowledge of such things is limited. However, I am not completely clueless as I have a C in A level Religious Studies, which was made up of 50% Ethics and 50% Islam. This C in half an A level of Ethics allowed me to quote, as I inevitably would (being a student), Kantian ethics in some witty context with my friends to make ourselves feel clever. What I am getting at here is that I am mainly clueless.
In conclusion, I will not use many quotes (especially those which are just other peoples opinions) to support my points because I think it doesn’t help, it’s pointless, I don’t know anything and I am a lazy twat.
No comments:
Post a Comment