Hi there my name is Kashish! Like some of you I am a foodie and I love to try
all sorts of cuisines. I have recently
moved to Delhi and have tried all the
different outlets here. Now I have enough
experience to start my own blog I wanted
to be a well-researched one unlike those
which currently exists here as the food
bloggers in Delhi seem to be very
egotistic and their focus lies on making
a name for themselves instead of
providing accurate information about food.
Currently I faced a dilemma of how to go
about my research and how to become a
critical food blogger instead of a traditional one.
Perhaps getting some inputs on this will help me out.
Oh look that's the renowned scholar Margaret Davies! Maybe she can help me.
Hi Kashish!
First thing to remember is that there is
never a determinate schema in research
Research is something that unfolds with
oneself. The method I suggest is thus
a journey, not a manifesto. You will need
to contextualize your research and I
think these three points will help you.
First is the "I" narrative. Engage with
what you are seeing and take
responsibility of your thoughts. One's
experiences are a legitimate source for
a research. Second is the location be
sure to let everyone know one's identarian, geographical and political locations etc
this adds to the "I". Thus, the last point
will be that the self will be in
production with the object of research I
feel the narrating an autobiographical
experience to explain my point will be
in line with these three points so
here's Roland Barthes, a person who
inspired me greatly to explain "the death of the author".
Looks like my essay on the death of the
author has clearly inspired Margaret
Davies.
Oh death of the author, what is that?
Death of the Author is my theory that
for a proper understanding of a text, the
writer should be separated from it thus
I call it death of the author. Davies had
a chance to interview one of her
favorite authors, however being a staunch
believer in my theory she refused to do
so. Maybe it wasn't the best thing of her to completely refuse an interview.
This act is in fact quite egotistical. Meeting the author would have given her a
pluralistic view on the subject. Research
needs to be guarded against this
egotistical and Supremacist "I" narrative
and needs to be kept in check.
Don't completely kill the author and give
yourself that supremacy.
Hey! Where did Roland go?
That's death of the author.
looks like he took his theory very literally
Oh
anyways now let's call Gasche
he's here to talk about challenging
tradition. Hey I'm Gasche.
my Derridean ideas have also greatly
inspired Davies. From what I've seen
challenging tradition is tradition
itself in philosophy.
Thus a dichotomy is created! so will you
follow tradition or break
tradition. When Davies refused that
interview the dogmatic rejection of
tradition is actually inscribing an
aspect of tradition! That is giving
supremacy to the reader so I suggest
reject this dichotomy! one doesn't have
to break or join tradition one needs to
only remain reflective about our own position
now here's Nietzsche to talk
about practicing passivity.
Yoo-Hoo look who's here it's your very favourite Nietzsche!
So is this the same passivity
which Kennedy talks about? Kashish, shut up and listen to me!
As Gasche suggested, for a philosopher to make a name for themselves,
they have to break tradition.
I suggest that that ego of the philosopher
should be broken down and a more
passive attitude should be developed.
not redefining the world through our
own conceptual uniformity but rather to listen first
and form one's attitude in response to a
multitude of voices. So we should all
shut up and listen!
I am Lugones. Hey Lugones! Like Nietzsche, I also
want you to practice passivity, but I also
want you to "travel to another's world" to
understand what it is to be them and
what we are in their eyes this will
constitute an ethical approach to
research in scholarship because this
specifically thinks plurality of self
use the process of knowing the others
world
so Kashish, I have just two more
points to end this with first is that
ethics as a method and not as a
normative idea I think cannot be
practiced as how research has to be
conducted but it is how research must be
conducted and the last point is of self
reflectivity those of us who
occupy a socially powerful position in
some respect for instance a group of
privileged students must be aware of the
benefits conferred by the power and be
willing to let go of our accumulated privilege.
so kashish was it helpful?
Helpful?? that was just like so much
information oh my god how do i process
so much at once??
I'm just so done with law school
