Yup, all done as of March 26. No longer dwelling in the abyss of ABDhood but officially PhD'd. The cherrie on top were that I awarded a pass with no distinction and that I don't have any revisions as such to complete - just a careful combing through of the text to ensure no awkwardness or errors persist through the multiple iterations out of which the final draft was born.
Color me relieved and excited to see what comes next.
A well-rested Dr. Bionic-Woman.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
The After Glow Satisfaction of a job well done. Or at least well enough. Sometimes, in the company of the Green Fairy, I sometimes wonder what our world would be like without benchmarks. It is almost like playing one of those tasteless video games back in the days when you had to visit a 'place of ill-repute' (at least according to the authorities) to actually spend hard-earned coin on meaningless electronic interaction. Nowadays, we zap our brains to oblivion sitting in the comfort (relativlee speaking; depends on your 'better half') of our living rooms, or dens, or lounges, or snugs.
The point is that the best games (or at least the most popular) were the ones that required basic skill; and the distance one could go down 'the tunnel' depended entirely on one's perseverance - as opposed to actual ability.
I liked those games.
Life was simpler then.
Not a fan of tunnels (consider all the trouble Alice got herself into).
So what would the world be without benchmarked tunnels? Why can't one just go down a rabbit-hole without any superlative classification getting in the way?
Is it because we use tunnels (or at least our choices of tunnels) to say something about us? Much like how we have come to use consumerism as beacon of our personality.
I don't know.
But I wish I were free to explore tunnels without an overwhelming sense of expectation (from other tunnel-ers) which only serves to maintain the elite status of the tunnel in question.
That said, the after glow is always nice. And usually warm. But the question remains: Are some tunnels warmer than others?
Saad D: I just noticed your comment. The thought of exploring a tunnel without purpose just for the joy of it doesn't seem to me to be a reason to want to do it. Yet, as I look back on this particular tunnel I am reminded that the journey has been just as important. Perhaps that's what we need to remember to notice? The tunnel and not just the light? You make me want to think and write.
When I started my soc degree, I could've sworn blind I believed in agency (vs. structure). But lately, months after being exposed to this particular dichotomy, I have unerringly swayed towards the reality that it is structure which ultimately overpowers. Hey, if it was good enough for Marx, then it's good enough for me. The point: well, I'm still on the fence with regards to the purpose vs. potential dichotomy. Is it purpose which defines us, or the other way round? Do we go down a tunnel because of where it leads us to (the purpose), or because we can/want to? Apropos, how important is the light then? And is the analogy of moths drawn to flame an appropriate one in this context? Is tunnel/light a functional pair, or can we split them apart? For now I'd say: Different moths, different flames I guess... sigh... back to square one!
I think I might have lost how the analogy connects with the agent vs. structure debate....but that might be because I'm not too sure about the divide itself. By which I mean that I think it is centuries and millennia of human actions that create structure and that agency isn't just "anything goes". Either way, which do you think is the tunnel and which the light or the journey? Purpose? Potential? Don't they connect to both structure and agent? I have to recollect my thoughts on agent vs. structure to be honest.
On splitting apart, that might be perspectival ala Freidrich. But perspectives are shaped by agents and structures.
To be perfectly honest, I think that all our -isms need to get beyond the swamp and mundaneness of old debates because they mask the more interesting ones that we don't get to because of colonial baggage.
I think that in our last 2 comments you and I have inserted a lot of short-hand for things we've been contemplating in systematic or unsystematic ways for many moons.
Shall we back it up and develop our thoughts together?
Hmmm. Well the 'purpose' aspect was introduced when you used that word (2nd last post), and since purpose directly relates to function, which in turn is underpinned by agency/structure... the tunnel/light equation expands in several directions simultaneously. Hope that clears up the analogy reference.
I'm afraid for the moment I can not agree with your position on agency/structure. For I conflate the concept of structure to include aspects of reality which are naturally occurring, and not only those which may be manmade. In that reading, whether one goes back centuries or millenia, it is structures which dictate action.
I also (rather gently) disagree with your attempt to toe classic debates under the rug (while finding the colonial reference quite hilarious!) and believe that tho modernity may use different language and constructs, the core arguments (and mysteries) remain the same. Whether it's Marx and Weber having a chat, or BW and DK.
I do see 'choice' being a fundamental variable in all these discussions, and that would tend to put 'tunnels' more in the category of 'structures' than 'action'. Thus tunnels symbolise the choices available.
As you say, we're using excessive shorthand to discuss some very complicated ideas, and in discussions such as these, etymology is as important as the epistemology itself. But it is very interesting nonetheless, that our meanings are filtering thru despite the heavy compression.
I like the coupling of 'systematic/unsystematic'... very apt. But how do you suggest we 'back up and develop' our thoughts together? Distance matters.
Post a Comment