There’s a whole series of terms in the social sciences and humanities (and I’m sure there are equivalents in the hard sciences, I just don’t know them that well) which do a couple of things:
Conversely, lots of terms in the "approved" list raise hackles among people who take science seriously. "Holistic" is Exhibit A. In "The Rosie Project", the hero (a scientist well out on the spectrum) is searching for books on (I think) pregnancy and remarks that, while the pile seemed overwhelming, the task was simplified because many of the books advertised their uselessness by warning labels with terms like "holistic".
Wonderful paper - I had it in mind all the way through reading this excellent post. I'm now in history rather than the social sciences, but I keep coming back to it when I need an injection of sound-headedness and theoretical clarity!
I mean, I wasn't being critical. Nor "critical." You were pretty damn exhaustive, can't get all of them at once! I do think that's an especially interesting one though; perhaps even more meta in its gesturing than some of the others. (Oh shit, was "meta" one of your candidates? I hope not.)
I'm also thinking "epistemic injustice" and "decolonial" for the first list, and "Western" and "neoliberal" for the second. Though, maybe you are trying to avoid terms that are already politicized.
I agree those are sometimes used in that way, but as you guess, I shyed away from some especially political terms, because I didn't want this to be about an anti theory or ideological disciplining exercise.
Didn't realize "naturalized" was used as a marker of unsophistication in the social sciences. I would've expected the opposite - I've seen it used in other fields to imply that a view is scientific and therefore more sophisticated than the alternatives (which are of course implied to be unscientific).
Conversely, lots of terms in the "approved" list raise hackles among people who take science seriously. "Holistic" is Exhibit A. In "The Rosie Project", the hero (a scientist well out on the spectrum) is searching for books on (I think) pregnancy and remarks that, while the pile seemed overwhelming, the task was simplified because many of the books advertised their uselessness by warning labels with terms like "holistic".
My friend Kieran Healy did the job on nuance.
I added him in after I sent the email. He really does pin it well!
Wonderful paper - I had it in mind all the way through reading this excellent post. I'm now in history rather than the social sciences, but I keep coming back to it when I need an injection of sound-headedness and theoretical clarity!
What about "critical?" (Asking for a friend).
Did I leave that one out? Urrgh. There’s a couple I thought of after I posted it, maybe I should make some additions.
I mean, I wasn't being critical. Nor "critical." You were pretty damn exhaustive, can't get all of them at once! I do think that's an especially interesting one though; perhaps even more meta in its gesturing than some of the others. (Oh shit, was "meta" one of your candidates? I hope not.)
I'm also thinking "epistemic injustice" and "decolonial" for the first list, and "Western" and "neoliberal" for the second. Though, maybe you are trying to avoid terms that are already politicized.
I agree those are sometimes used in that way, but as you guess, I shyed away from some especially political terms, because I didn't want this to be about an anti theory or ideological disciplining exercise.
I feel like "overdetermined" is still a useful word but most of the rest of these could be burned.
Didn't realize "naturalized" was used as a marker of unsophistication in the social sciences. I would've expected the opposite - I've seen it used in other fields to imply that a view is scientific and therefore more sophisticated than the alternatives (which are of course implied to be unscientific).