Conceptual configurations for unlikely conclusions

I have been re-planning the two chapters that make up the part of my dissertation that is supposed to deal with subjectivization/politics. While my drafting is always heavily controlled by [that is, bogged down in] my empirical material, it is all configured by a very particular conceptualisation of the world (and ethnographic research). After seven dot points in a row that were not examples, I found myself ready to draw a conclusion: I am offering an apologia for nepotism.

I probably shouldn't even let this handwriting out in public.

I probably shouldn’t even let this handwriting out in public.

Of course, I am not going to write in praise of nepotism (and not just because I will never finish writing anything).  I do care about the suffering that results when standards of fairness do not exist (even though I am working on critical analyses of the notions of care and fairness). However, do I think existing relationships with people are not a bad way to be exposed to different knowledge. This is particularly the case as my attention to people and ideas is never truly assigned on a qualification-free basis.

My ironic reflection, as a way to return to meta-commentary on writing, is that I not only came to that point in a series of dot points free from the names of particular people and groups from field work but I did so on a day where I have only had a few incidental (and non-thesis-related) conversations with people.

Advertisements

Tags:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s