The world would be a better place if more academic papers included this caption--in bright neon letters and all caps. (via Dani K Nedal, as XCKD long ceased to be on my regular reading list)
Many, many people have emailed or tweeted this image to me. But the best version, by far, is the one above. It has been making the rounds on Facebook and comes from "OP."
Someone comes along with a "Call Me Maybe" joke. A mashup of Nine Inch Nails' "Head Like a Hole" and the insidious zombie-song of last summer. The worst part? It works.
I should probably be wary of taunting the coming moopocalypse, but, as everyone knows, I laugh in the face of obsolescence. So, without further explanation, here are my top ten reasons for MOOCs:...
Wow. If you can write a dissertation on the politics of shark attacks as an IR specialist, I think you can do pretty much anything. From the Ted website:Chris Neff is a third year PhD candidate in Government and International Relations at the University of Sydney. He is conducting the world's first doctoral dissertation on the politics of shark attacks.Of course, I'm curious to know how this dissertation topic relates to IR precisely. (I get the comparative politics angle.) Perhaps Megan, who I believe teaches in his department and to whom I owe the incomparable joy of watching this clip,...
I've been meaning to write substantive posts about my recent trip to Taiwan, but between the time change, conference prep, and getting sick, I haven't had the time. In the interim, I found a video of the knife-making process at Maester Wu knives on Kinmen. Kinmen (aka Jinmen aka Quemoy) was repeatedly, and intensively, shelled by the People's Republic of China in 1958. Maester Wu Bombshell Steel Knives took advantage of the cheap source of steel and produces kitchen, hunting, and utility blades. The knives can be bought through limited online outlets; the factory pictured above has become a...
A standard critical argument in my field looks something like this:1. Phenomenon X involves A assumptions about the world;2. Approach Y contains assumptions inconsistent with A; therefore3. Y cannot be used to understand X.In some instances, and given some specific conditions, this can be a persuasive argument. But it is clearly not a priori true; articulated in the form above, I submit, it is a logical fallacy--one often found alongside, but distinct from, genetic fallacies.Thus, I will call this the "own-termism fallacy" until someone finds a better--or, at least, preexisting--name for...
 On a wall outside of the Intercultural Center auditorium. Make of it what you will.
This is our cat in the bath. He doesn't really do anything funny. He just stands in the bathtub. Then he leaves.  That was then (or, to be more precise but still vague, a few months ago). He now usually joins our daughter for her bath time. He also makes sure to come into the shower for a minute or two. And he has started imitating us by testing the temperature of the shower with his paw.So, here's the question: do we own a cat idiot, or is spending long periods of time in a filled bathtub a sign that he's some sort of feline kwisatz haderarch?Â
Do academics use Linkedin for anything? I inquire because a small, but not insignificant, number of people ask to join my network. Their requests accumulate. The auto-generated reminders become annoying. I log into the site and expand my professional ties. The process begins anew. No other circumstances compel me to visit Linkedin. I suppose I could cancel my membership, but that seems like too much effort. Am I missing something?
James Vreeland imagines the possibilities.
Lest I be accused of shielding myself from satire.....Political psychologists are a kind of political scientist. Or maybe they are a kind of psychologist. In truth, no one really gets to know them very well. That is because political psychologists think everyone is stupid.Political psychologists think you have never made a good decision in your life. For instance, if 600 people are going to die of a terrible disease and you are given a choice between a health program that will 1) surely kill 400 and save the rest or 2) will have a one third probability of saving 600 people but 2/3 of killing...