I spent so much time in academia. A lot of us are trained to make objective and impersonal analysis (such as avoiding the use of personal pronouns “I”, “we”, “us” etc.), which I did not realise before sounds dispassionate and cold to laymen. Someone asked me if I’m a bot because apparently I sounded like an anime character. A couple of times, I get into arguments because normal folks would accuse me of “yOu aRe mAkInG ExCuSeS tO TyRaNtS!!” for making a realpolitik analysis of a situation (/r/geopolitics in Reddit is heavily derided for this by average Redditors).
Academically trained folks are ingrained to be conscious of bias and rather encouraged to be more descriptive with the analysis, and less with prescriptive. Otherwise we’d get accused of bias. But when academics do voice out their opinions based on evidence and careful study, they’d be accused of bias. I probably don’t need to elaborate how often educational institutions are accused of being left or liberal. News flash: academics do not come in with inherent bias towards left/liberal thinking, it’s just that their study led them to be more left leaning. Wait until I tell people I am an advocate for a world government by giving UN more power. I might be accused as a globalist bot.
i dislike, but accept, academic style. my argument against it is that the total reliance on passive voice makes research FAR less accessible to people for whom english is a second languange and neurodivergent people. older academics tell me i’m being anti-intellectual. younger academics tell me they don’t know what passive voice is and don’t believe it exists.
i don’t really… know what to make of that divide, if i’m being honest
my argument against it is that the total reliance on passive voice makes research FAR less accessible to people for whom english is a second languange and neurodivergent people. older academics tell me i’m being anti-intellectual.
That’s fair and completely understandable. One of the major reasons for anti-intellectualism are experts talking down on average people. A lot of experts and academics are typically affluent who hardly have to live with salt-of-the-earth, everyday workers and working class. It’s a well-known problem who in academia who scoff at student and laypeople. I am not an academic by profession, although I try to know the audience and talk to their level. But I admit that maybe I have come across as smug before without realising it.
younger academics tell me they don’t know what passive voice is and don’t believe it exists.
I guess the person just have to read academic literatures in their field to get the grasp on how to speak passively. It took awhile for me to master it.
usually the younger cohort defaults to passive voice in all communication.
also i didn’t think you came across as a problem at all! sorry if it seemed like i was criticizing you or your position. this is a very general frustration i’ve had with academia ever since i wrote my senior ethics paper
I spent so much time in academia. A lot of us are trained to make objective and impersonal analysis (such as avoiding the use of personal pronouns “I”, “we”, “us” etc.), which I did not realise before sounds dispassionate and cold to laymen. Someone asked me if I’m a bot because apparently I sounded like an anime character. A couple of times, I get into arguments because normal folks would accuse me of “yOu aRe mAkInG ExCuSeS tO TyRaNtS!!” for making a realpolitik analysis of a situation (/r/geopolitics in Reddit is heavily derided for this by average Redditors).
Academically trained folks are ingrained to be conscious of bias and rather encouraged to be more descriptive with the analysis, and less with prescriptive. Otherwise we’d get accused of bias. But when academics do voice out their opinions based on evidence and careful study, they’d be accused of bias. I probably don’t need to elaborate how often educational institutions are accused of being left or liberal. News flash: academics do not come in with inherent bias towards left/liberal thinking, it’s just that their study led them to be more left leaning. Wait until I tell people I am an advocate for a world government by giving UN more power. I might be accused as a globalist bot.
Maybe learn to switch out of the academic style for social media? Like do you include citation footers in texts to your family?
If by social media you mean the brain rotting, ragebaiting sites like Facebook, X or Instagram, I don’t argue on them.
i dislike, but accept, academic style. my argument against it is that the total reliance on passive voice makes research FAR less accessible to people for whom english is a second languange and neurodivergent people. older academics tell me i’m being anti-intellectual. younger academics tell me they don’t know what passive voice is and don’t believe it exists.
i don’t really… know what to make of that divide, if i’m being honest
That’s fair and completely understandable. One of the major reasons for anti-intellectualism are experts talking down on average people. A lot of experts and academics are typically affluent who hardly have to live with salt-of-the-earth, everyday workers and working class. It’s a well-known problem who in academia who scoff at student and laypeople. I am not an academic by profession, although I try to know the audience and talk to their level. But I admit that maybe I have come across as smug before without realising it.
I guess the person just have to read academic literatures in their field to get the grasp on how to speak passively. It took awhile for me to master it.
usually the younger cohort defaults to passive voice in all communication.
also i didn’t think you came across as a problem at all! sorry if it seemed like i was criticizing you or your position. this is a very general frustration i’ve had with academia ever since i wrote my senior ethics paper