寻找原型:构建和挑战简化的知识

IF 0.3 0 RELIGION Culture and Religion Pub Date : 2018-08-08 DOI:10.1080/14755610.2018.1505759
S. Lawson, S. Ramey
{"title":"寻找原型:构建和挑战简化的知识","authors":"S. Lawson, S. Ramey","doi":"10.1080/14755610.2018.1505759","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The social media uproar in Fall 2017 over a nursing textbook chart that presented generalised characterisations of minority groups generated an assumption that medical training needs more Religious Studies expertise. Analysing the sources that the chart cited, we trace the authors’ assertions to studies of varying quality and identify several specific processes involved in simplifying knowledge for dissemination, as the authors disregarded the limits of each specific study and ignored counter-evidence or otherwise evaded critical scrutiny. Comparing this example to examples from world religions discourse illustrates both differences and similarities in the process of constructing simplified presentations. While both presumably developed out of good intentions, they generate significant problems in their effort to shape material to support larger arguments. Thus, scholars across disciplines should critique and complicate their own processes for generating simplified knowledge.","PeriodicalId":45190,"journal":{"name":"Culture and Religion","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2018-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14755610.2018.1505759","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sourcing stereotypes: constructing and challenging simplified knowledge\",\"authors\":\"S. Lawson, S. Ramey\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14755610.2018.1505759\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The social media uproar in Fall 2017 over a nursing textbook chart that presented generalised characterisations of minority groups generated an assumption that medical training needs more Religious Studies expertise. Analysing the sources that the chart cited, we trace the authors’ assertions to studies of varying quality and identify several specific processes involved in simplifying knowledge for dissemination, as the authors disregarded the limits of each specific study and ignored counter-evidence or otherwise evaded critical scrutiny. Comparing this example to examples from world religions discourse illustrates both differences and similarities in the process of constructing simplified presentations. While both presumably developed out of good intentions, they generate significant problems in their effort to shape material to support larger arguments. Thus, scholars across disciplines should critique and complicate their own processes for generating simplified knowledge.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45190,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Culture and Religion\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-08-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14755610.2018.1505759\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Culture and Religion\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14755610.2018.1505759\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Culture and Religion","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14755610.2018.1505759","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

2017年秋季,一份护理教科书图表呈现了少数群体的总体特征,在社交媒体上引起了轩然大波,这引发了一种假设,即医学培训需要更多的宗教研究专业知识。分析图表引用的来源,我们将作者的断言追溯到不同质量的研究,并确定了简化知识传播所涉及的几个具体过程,因为作者忽视了每个特定研究的局限性,忽略了反证据或以其他方式逃避了批判性审查。将这个例子与世界宗教话语的例子进行比较,可以看出在构建简化表述的过程中既有差异也有相似之处。虽然两者都可能出于良好的意图,但它们在努力塑造材料以支持更大的论点时产生了重大问题。因此,跨学科的学者应该批判和复杂化他们自己产生简化知识的过程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Sourcing stereotypes: constructing and challenging simplified knowledge
ABSTRACT The social media uproar in Fall 2017 over a nursing textbook chart that presented generalised characterisations of minority groups generated an assumption that medical training needs more Religious Studies expertise. Analysing the sources that the chart cited, we trace the authors’ assertions to studies of varying quality and identify several specific processes involved in simplifying knowledge for dissemination, as the authors disregarded the limits of each specific study and ignored counter-evidence or otherwise evaded critical scrutiny. Comparing this example to examples from world religions discourse illustrates both differences and similarities in the process of constructing simplified presentations. While both presumably developed out of good intentions, they generate significant problems in their effort to shape material to support larger arguments. Thus, scholars across disciplines should critique and complicate their own processes for generating simplified knowledge.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
期刊最新文献
Theopolitical police: BOPE, Christianity and popular culture in Rio de Janeiro Putting out the candle: Sufism and the orgy libel in late Ottoman and modern Turkey The making of living ḥadīth: a new direction of ḥadīth studies in Indonesia A Sufi pedagogy of community-engaged self-cultivation: contemporary approaches to training, accountability, and religious abuse in Sufism The presentation and self-presentation of mosques in Norwegian mediascapes: construction of ‘the good ones’
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1