Revision as of 21:40, 21 August 2004 editBishonen (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators80,326 edits I logicked the final sentence← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 09:39, 26 May 2021 edit undoDeryck Chan (talk | contribs)Administrators22,733 edits rcat, also remove anchor to deleted sectionTags: Redirect target changed 2017 wikitext editor |
(423 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) |
Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
#REDIRECT ] |
|
One danger for ]s is '''academic elitism''', which is (roughly) the view that only someone who has engaged in ] has anything worthwhile to say on any given topic, while all others are ]s. Of course, it is possible for one to value serious scholarship without being an academic elitist. |
|
|
|
{{rcat shell| |
|
|
|
|
|
{{R from subtopic}} |
|
In fields that have no non-academic counterpart, academic elitism is common because it actually is the case that there are not very many people with anything worthwhile to say on the topic, other than the academics. The problem starts when scholarship blurs with the application of scholarship, such as in ] or ], or with ] in the case of ] and ]. In such cases academic elitism arises when those in pursuit of scholarly knowledge deride the pursuit of application. |
|
|
|
{{R with possibilities}} |
|
|
|
|
|
}} |
|
Academic elitism is the opposite of ], the belief that |
|
|
"ivory tower" academics are too far removed from reality to have anything possibly useful to say about practical matters. |
|