http://www.nehrlich.com/blog/2004/09/29/why-do-we-write/ Eric Nehrlich, Unrepentant Generalist Sat, 04 Feb 2012 15:12:49 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 http://www.nehrlich.com/blog/2004/09/29/why-do-we-write/comment-page-1/#comment-2939 Eric Nehrlich, Unrepentant Generalist || Evaluating quality of construction || June || 2006 Mon, 19 Jun 2006 00:08:06 +0000 /?p=125#comment-2939 [...] And, as usual, Latour makes the same point. In one of his footnotes (note 180, p. 127), he comments that “The same epistemologists who have fallen in love with Popper’s falsifiability principle would be well advised to prolong his insight all the way to the text itself and to render explicit the conditions under which their writing can fail as well.” In other words, one must determine why one is writing something, and then evaluate it based on whether it succeeds at those criteria. Latour’s point is that just because one is writing a paper rather than an experimental proposal does not mean there should be less rigor. [...] [...] And, as usual, Latour makes the same point. In one of his footnotes (note 180, p. 127), he comments that “The same epistemologists who have fallen in love with Popper’s falsifiability principle would be well advised to prolong his insight all the way to the text itself and to render explicit the conditions under which their writing can fail as well.” In other words, one must determine why one is writing something, and then evaluate it based on whether it succeeds at those criteria. Latour’s point is that just because one is writing a paper rather than an experimental proposal does not mean there should be less rigor. [...]

]]>