#no snobbery attached I genuinely just want to know | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

rpbetter · 3 years

Text

Traditional Writing Advice & RP

I see a lot of people reblogging writing advice posts, and while it pleases me to see people trying to appreciate RP as writing, those pieces of advice don’t always translate from traditional writing to RP writing.

Following the advice for writing a traditional book manuscript you want to have published, you are going to run into some issues if you follow every point of it faithfully in an RP setting.

For one thing, this isn’t just your story, you’re telling it with another writer. In RP, our reading audience and our writing partners are the same. We have to create well-written, engaging stories that are also meant to be picked up by someone else and furthered. For another, even among the most writing proficient RPers, this is a more relaxed style of writing for a reason; we’re writing neither a paper to be graded nor a work to be published, we’re expressing creativity with other people. It can fall flat quickly, to your writing partners and to yourself, if you are writing in an extremely formal manner in RP.

Writing is one of the creative pursuits that has lent itself heavily to what I’m going to politely call snobbery, and that is part of the problem here. The RPC is rather filled with muns who are self-concious, devalue themselves and their work, and can be desperate for the approval of being A Real Writer. If you love writing and you do write, you’re a writer. No, that definitely doesn’t make you a good writer, but following rules not meant for you isn’t going to make you one either.

There is a wrong way to write, actually, there are hundreds of wrong ways to write that make me want to rip my own face off on the regular. The thing is, there is no one-size-fits-all correct way to write any more than there is such a standard in visual art. There are principles that one should know and follow, but your style might be neoclassical or modern or impressionist. Saying that, in my personal opinion, things falling under the heading of modern-style art is horrid, thus inherently wrong and not art, I’d be imposing my personal aesthetics instead of encouraging people to follow appropriate principles, run with their passion and skill, and make art that moves people who are not me. That’s important, in general, but it’s even more important when we’re talking about creative art as a hobby-as a legitimate passion project one isn’t obliged to devote themselves to.

That’s the way we need to be looking at writing as well. Not as an academic and absolute Right Way, but as an art form that has principles, and indeed, literal form. By insisting otherwise, we’ve damaged writing as a hobby and a profession, and it really shows in the RPC where you have a rather stark division of muns who, on the one side, are so ate up with bizarre concepts their professor threw out about never using “said,” forcing the ideology of their personal academic experience on others, and using traditional writing advice as Word of God to shame others and elevate themselves. On the other side, you have a ton of muns who just won’t even bother anymore, and why should they? They’re genuinely not up to par, but working on it means both a process of shaming and killing their own creative experience.

In saying all this, I want to be really clear here: I am in no way saying that shitty writing, an inability to follow basic grammatical principles, being unwilling to use the damn spellcheck that is standard everywhere, and having no concept of things like storytelling, characterization, and word flow is excusable or ideal.

It isn’t. It’s a terribly destructive force in the RPC, and I’m not in the camp of excusing disinterest in learning, improving, and perfecting one’s hobby because it is an unpaid hobby. In my opinion, it’s part of the blight of the current RPC. However, the snobbery and inability to recognize that there is nuance to learning and writing situations has done nothing but worsen this issue.

So, that being said, some items that are 100% good to use traditionally and in RP include:

Grammar, spelling, and punctuation.

We’re not all native English speakers, and grammar is difficult anyway. It can also turn a story bland with expedience when too properly adhered to. Know the basic principles, but also, be asking yourself about both popular works of fiction and your own favorite works. Chances are, they do not strictly adhere to the rules. Experienced, naturally gifted, and learned writers all manipulate those rules to work for their stories, characters, world-building, and so on. It becomes a personalized writing style, and it’s alright if it takes you some practice to find yours.

Just remember, grammar exists for a reason. Removing or mutating too much will leave you with a difficult to read and understand mess that isn’t a style, just a fucking mess.

If you struggle with grammar, the best way to help yourself is to practice. Additionally, seeing what errors you are making can be quite helpful; Grammarly offers a free add on for both Google Chrome and FireFox that will show you spelling and grammar mistakes. It also explains the mistake, while offering you a suggested fix. This way, you can see the mistakes you’re making in action. {Presumably, there are other such resources, but since I have no experience with them, I’m not the one to recommend them.}

As I said above, spellcheckers are standard now, in fucking 2021. This has been standard on devices and browsers for so long that I highly doubt most people on tumblr even remember a time when you had to use additional software to have them.

You make a mistake or misspell, and if it isn’t corrected for you, it’s underlined very obviously for you to tap/click/float over to correct. If the word is so terribly misspelled that no suggestion comes up {not all spellcheckers are created equality; some do not recognize slang or relaxed spellings, archaic word use, myriad, particularly specialized jargon-legal, medical, technical-and so on}, we also live in a time period where we can highlight the word, right-click that bitch, and select from the menu the option to search for the word. If the word was so weirdly misspelled that your checker couldn’t figure it out, it is incredibly rare that Google doesn’t throw out the correct spelling when you search it. If the spelling was correct, but the word-use is slang, jargon, or archaic, Google is also going to tell you that-you’ve confirmed it is correct, and can now decide if you want to use it or pick a possible synonym for it instead.

There is no fucking excuse for egregiously misspelled words anymore. None. I mean...listen, I spell quite terribly myself, but no one reading my RP replies is ever going to know that fact. Having difficulty with spelling is not, and has not been for a very long time now, an impediment to writing.

Furthermore, we all miss a typo here and there, especially if we write lengthy novella. Those aren’t always going to be caught by spellcheck, and we might edit the reply five times without seeing it. That happens, it’s alright when it’s minimal! Anything other than that, though, it’s just a combination of rushing and laziness. You really couldn’t be assed to take your time with that reply, read it over at least once before posting, and/or to click the underlined word.

There. Is. No. Excuse.

Again, not all spellcheckers are the same. If you feel like yours is lacking, try an extension for your browser. Since I said it above, I obviously have Grammarly on my mine. My replies effectively go through three different checkers, actually. I write all drafts outside of my browser where it is initially checked by Pages, then, when I paste it into tumblr, it’s being checked natively and by Grammarly. It wasn’t my intention, I just wanted to be positive I was never losing a draft or cooking my ancient laptop with Google Docs. However, it’s been nice as hell to get the perspective of multiple checkers, and as such, I definitely recommend it. It isn’t like I’m putting any extra effort into this, and I’m not paying for Grammarly, either.

When you refuse to behoove yourselves of the spellchecker natively available to you, at least, you’re seriously telling your writing partners that they were not important enough for you to click a fucking word. It’s inexcusable.

Punctuation being nonexistent isn’t a writing style or aesthetic, neither is a refusal to capitalize anything. If never using a comma is part of your Aesthetic™, please, rethink your fucking life and the hobby you’ve chosen.

Punctuation is a part of grammar, and I understand that there can be complexities present that might be confusing. That is one of the reasons why you should bother to know the basics as regards when and how to use punctuation. It’s also another way in which telling people that they should adhere to advice meant for traditional and academic writing can be a shit idea. Especially in an RPC known to misunderstand shit and go overboard.

When you tell the RPC that writers use too many commas, the RPC stops using them all around. Especially, when you also attach this to the idea of evil “wordiness.” That’s something that the RPC is desperate to avoid anyway, as the majority of people here are allergic to reading and writing; anything you advise that lessens the word count for them is going to be grabbed and erroneously applied. Someone implies that wordiness and commas equals run-on sentences, and the RPC gets not only believes it, it gets this message, “if I take out the commas, it isn’t a run-on sentence.”

You have all fundamentally misunderstood what a god damned run-on sentence is. It’s not a long sentence, it isn’t a proliferation of commas. A run-on sentence is when two, or more, sentences that should be individual are conjoined without proper punctuation {a fucking comma, for example} or a coordinating conjunction.

Run-ons can be surprisingly short, in fact. As in the example I lifted from here, “I love to write papers I would write one every day if I had the time.“

That should be written with a comma, separated into two sentences, or broken with a comma and the conjunction “and.” It’s also what I see incessantly on my dash from this bizarre idea that we shouldn’t be using commas. That a run-on sentence is a very long one separated only by commas. That is literally not what a run-on sentence is.

You absolutely can use too many commas {if you want to read some examples of how to use commas, go here}, but I rarely see anyone doing so to such an extreme. The extreme being that a sentence becomes a nonsensical string of conjoined thoughts, ideas, and descriptions that could have been written better broken up into fully formed sentences. I sometimes see muns who go a little nuts with commas by putting them in wildly incorrect places in this way.

What I see constantly is either muns berating themselves for perfectly normal, readable sentence structure or muns reactively using no punctuation at all.

It is all legitimate run-on sentences or those made so short and blunt that they become nonsensical, change the tone of the writing, or have no flow together.

Which brings me to...

Sentence flow is a thing, and you should be doing it.

Unfortunately, this good writing advice tends to throw people. We’re not talking about the flow that needs to be present in academic sentence structure, or exactly the flow that is present in poetry. Though it may require practice to understand and apply well, it’s an incredibly simple concept.

You want to balance out shorter, blunter sentences with those that are longer and more flowing. It gives the text a pleasant, natural rhythm. However, it isn’t just about length, a thing that the RPC is weirdly fixated on. Rather, it’s about word use within those sentences as well.

It’s always important to write with a tone that works with your scene and, overall, with your muse. For example, in a tense, aggressive scene, or with a muse who is generally this way, it gets the message across to use short sentences and clipped words. We can feel the tension, annoyance, and threat.

Furthermore, the way your muse thinks about and uses words is relevant. A well-educated muse from the 1800′s isn’t going to have the same approach to words that a modern-day high school student does. You should be making that clear in the way they speak, but also, in the way you express their thoughts and actions. If you are only writing your muse’s personality and emotional tone when your muse is speaking, you’re not giving me the tone all the way through. It can feel like a marked delineation in flow.

However, you should be considering the overall flow of your writing as well. Did you just lay down back-to-back eloquently verbose sentences? If so, you may want to either follow them up or space them with a shorter sentence comprised of simpler words.

This is legitimately good writing advice for any manner of writing.

So is...

Show, don’t tell.

Which is another piece of advice that throws people when they try to make it more complex than necessary. That, and it grates up against the RPC’s need for short, quick writing. The idea that anything a mun gives you that your muse cannot react to verbally or with action is filler to be avoided. That idea comes from some principle advice that translates badly to RP; essentially, don’t wax poetic for three pages when it has nothing to do with the plot, characters, scene-setting elements, action, and so on. Don’t be Tolkien describing every tree and rock in excruciating detail on the way to destroy the One Ring, basically.

That isn’t fully appropriate advice in RP, where we’re having to write tiny chapters to each other to add onto. While it still has some merit, the RPC definitely has taken it to mean that you shouldn’t show anything. My muse’s private thoughts, emotions expressed and unexpressed, stirred-up memories, things they planned to say/do, but that were naturally interrupted by the flow of the thread all become Unnecessary. With...no mind to what they are showing and creating.

This particularly erodes writing muses as legitimate feeling people. As in the last example of what my muse intended to say or do that was interrupted. That’s a normal, human experience. It would be difficult and not enjoyable to read every instance of a muse’s broken thoughts and impulses or intentions, but giving one every so many replies in a natural feeling way keeps my muse presenting as a real person having a real person’s experience. Simple things like this go a long way toward your muse being “believable,” and by ignoring them or refusing to do them, you’re not making your muse very realistic. So much of the human experience is private, unknowable to outside parties.

Look...if you only knew me based upon a sterilized version of what I was saying to you or doing purely within the context of single interaction at a time, you wouldn’t know me at all. You’d have no idea what sort of nuance there is in my words, how I am expressing or withholding an opinion or emotion. I may not have any opinions, emotions, or other experiences that you are not contributing to. That’s very unrealistic, I’m not actually a person anymore. I haven’t any personality, I didn’t exist before you interacted with me.

That is the way it is with muses too. By stripping them of their internal experiences, we’re stripping them of more realistic feeling characterization. {It becomes, or adds to, a disastrous domino-effect of projected, cardboard stand-in style muses that are in no way a joy to interact with.} This is bad writing, makes for bad reading and interacting.

No one seems to understand show, don’t tell. Let me put it in a simple example: don’t tell me your muse is a good person, show me. Don’t tell me your muse is upset right now, show me.

Your muse has character traits you feel makes them A Good Person. They are compassionate, selfless, and genuinely interested in others. Don’t just leave that in the muse’s bio, or relegate it to statement-style lines like, “she cared deeply about others.” Show me these traits in action and thought. You don’t require anything dramatic to it, either. A muse like this should be a good listener, proceed with their love language in a way reflects personal involvement and a desire to comfort, be willing to sacrifice time and personal interests {don’t keep it to dramatic and literal self-sacrifice to show “selfless”}, legitimately doesn’t think of themselves first and foremost and may need reminding to care for themselves, and will be troubled by unfairness and cruelty in the world.

Your muse has been in a disagreement with a loved one, they’re not just “upset,” they are sad, angry, disappointed, and maybe even confused or surprised. While those are more descriptive and defining of the type of complex “upset” going on here, don’t leave it at these words. Don’t tell me that she said, angrily. Show me that she is having thoughts based on these emotions, actual emotional turmoil at her expectations of a loved one being devastated. Paint me a picture of the sadness in her features, the anger in her walk, how her words come out unpolished and jumbled in her surprise and turmoil.

This is what it means to show me, not tell me.

It also extends to scenes and recollections.

If your muse is happy sitting in her garden, don’t just tell me this. Show me why she is happy there, and define the sort of happiness in her thoughts, body language, voice, and expressions. Describe the aspects of the garden in tones of the happiness they bring, draw comparisons between this and her outward expression of joy with similar word use. It ties together both seamlessly in a way that we can relate to and feel, even if we hate the outdoors.

If this muse had a traumatic incident in her past, this is going to inconveniently come up, even if only in her mind. Don’t play coy about it and drop shit on your partners like, “she was thinking of things and stuff that was bad again.” No. Even if you are alluding or otherwise keeping the actual event secretive, you need to be describing how the muse is feeling, how she is experiencing the world around her through an overlay of upsetting reminders. Show me how she is having a visceral reaction to triggering stimuli while having to keep working or talking.

Additionally, even when your muse isn’t experiencing the scene you have set directly, you should show me instead of telling me about it.

Since my actual least favorite PSA on how it’s better to just tell people because no one wants to read “all that” deals with rain, we’re going to as well. Because it doesn’t have to be excessively descriptive to fucking show me it’s raining or has rained instead of just stating the fact.

Not, “it was raining.” Not, “it was wet outside.”

“In between her words, the distant, wall-dampened splash of cars driving through puddles.”

“He passed by windows beaded with moisture on his way to the kitchen.”

Wow, that was so complex, really a lot to read to get the idea that it is, or has been, raining outside without me directly telling you this!

There isn’t anything wrong with being more descriptive than this {nor is there anything wrong with using the word “rain,” so long as you’re backing it up with a description}, some of us do like to read and write about things like oil-slicked puddles in the street if our muse is seeing them or it is otherwise relevant. It’s just that you don’t have to do this, or have to do it at all times, to show instead of tell. This is yet another serious misunderstanding.

It isn’t that the description is often really that excessive, it’s more often that it is irrelevant to the extreme of sticking out weirdly. In the puddle thing, if my muse isn’t seeing it and/or I am not using that description to further experience, their mindset, personality, or tying it to an analogy later in the reply, it feels weird.

Some superfluous shit isn’t bad either, and superfluous can be purely subjective. It is, again, when it is to such an extreme as to leave your writing partner feeling oddly about a point in the text that seemed to ring with importance, but then held none. That isn’t an act of showing or telling, and neither is it your partner trying to show off as a gifted writer. For whatever reason, they just saw or felt that moment with such passionate clarity they had to include it immediately instead of waiting until a better moment for it. That’s literally it, there’s no need to project your insecurity in weird ass ways.

There are definitely other pieces of traditional-based writing advice that are great and either do transfer to RP perfectly or can with small amendments, but these are the most basic, commonly seen, and important combinations. They are also easy to better understand and apply!

When reading writing advice posts, please, ask yourself how they fit into RP. If they do at all. Many times, when it comes to the absolute basics of writing coherently and enjoyably, or developing characters, they’re great. It’s when they get into topics of some nuance that they don’t cross over so well and are outright damaging.

These pieces of advice are often being misunderstood or misapplied already, then are being passed around to a community notorious for its lacking application of critical thinking. Severe misunderstanding will happen, and terrible writing “rules” within the RPC develop from them.

Do be interested in writing, don’t separate traditional writing and RP writing into categories like “real writing and RP,” be invested in learning and improving. Just ask yourself how it applies to cooperative storytelling that is often thematic in nature, and proceed with caution and the mindset that writing is an art.

If you have the principles down and both yourself and others are enjoying your writing, you’re not doing it in an inherently wrong way because it wouldn’t be published. You’re not writing RP to have it published, and that’s not a bad thing. It’s just a difference to keep in mind when reading PSA’s about the Rules of Writing Whatever.

#tumblr rp #rp help #rp advice #rph #tumblr rpc #rpbetter #rpb #roleplay better #tumblr rp advice #traditional writing advice and rp #queue

6 notes · View notes

veliseraptor · 5 years

Note

If you’re still doing AU’s, child Loki meets child Steve? (Somehow since they age differently)

before I go off, @thelightofthingshopedfor wrote a great fic of this (under bright stars burning) so you should check that out.

moving on to the headcanons - we can just go with the fact that time moves differently on Asgard and when Loki visits ages align. that’s generally what I’ve seen in a few different “Loki visits people on Earth pre-movie canon” fics, and it works for me.

I wrote a little about this in the headcanons I did about Loki meeting Steve in the 30s, but - Steve I think would hate Loki initially. Loki does kind of exude privilege and rich-kid snobbery (he has it, it’s genuine), and he does a lot of posturing too (covering up insecurity and uncertainty when he doesn’t really know what he’s doing), and both of those things would put Steve’s back up right off the bat.

and Loki of course does not deescalate. the opposite, really. especially if he feels wronged or like someone’s being unfair - his reaction then is to go “well if you’re going to be like that I’ll antagonize you as much as possible”

but Loki also does (at least at this point) have a soft spot for underdogs and the vulnerable, and will do something when he feels like there’s an imbalance that needs flipping, and that happening - either witnessing or on Steve’s behalf - might turn Steve around some. cautiously. at least maybe this guy isn’t quite as much of a jackass as he first appeared.

and Loki is...honestly, underneath all the bravado and posturing and, yes, being kind of a jackass - he’s lonely, and wants friends (who aren’t Thor) and is a little smug about getting an Earth friend (who isn’t attached to Thor and is his friend first) and basically when Steve is like “maybe you’re not so bad” Loki quick does an about face and is like “LET’S BE FRIENDS.”

Loki at this age is much more emotionally open to other people - the closing off and putting up walls comes later.

kid!Loki is...kind of an overwhelming friend to have. he has a lot of energy and a lot of ideas and no real sense of what’s possible or impossible. he’s still learning his magic and his limits. and he has no real sense of Steve’s limits because he’s not used to humans and Steve specifically of course has...pretty significant limits

the first time Steve has an asthma attack around Loki, or is otherwise hurt/incapacitated, Loki panics and thinks he’s dying and possibly that he killed him. and even once he realizes he didn’t, he bolts, which of course hurts Steve deeply, and makes him very angry, and what did he think was going to happen, Prince Loki is a jackass after all. (Steve doesn’t believe Loki about him being a prince.)

and it takes a little while but Loki does come back and apologize and it does kind of fuck up their relationship for a while, but...he’s more careful, after that. more aware. and busily searching on the side for a way to help make Steve stronger so he’s not so vulnerable to being hurt. because losing his best friend would be...devastating. he doesn’t even like thinking about it. and he’s human, and humans are so fragile and Steve even more so...

he’s going to find a way to keep him safe.

and of course at some point when they start getting into teen years Steve gets his “oh no he’s hot” moment which is kind of devastating because of course that’s never going to be how Loki feels, and a lot of pining ensues.

#steve&loki 5ever #aggressively headcanons #five headcanons meme #oh captain my captain #loki's a goddamn mess #anonymous #conversating

43 notes · View notes

jameskennedyfans · 6 years

Text

James Kennedy - In Defence of Conspiracy Theories

Originally posted on www.jameskennedystuff.com and shared by True Activist.

There is much snobbish dismissal of so called ‘conspiracy theories’ from the scientific, political, academic & journalistic community. I argue that conspiracy theories are a valid & necessary contribution to the discussion of certain events & deserve just as much credibility as those of the ‘experts’. I say this as someone who wholeheartedly subscribes to scientific methodology & sceptical thought as the best means of getting closest to the ‘truth’ of a subject – the need for solid evidence & rigorous testing being the process by which a ‘theory’ becomes an established fact (until proven otherwise). Another facet of that way of thinking is that the pursuit of truth must outweigh any emotional or personal attachment one might have for their ‘theory’ – if their beloved theory is proven to be undeniably incorrect, then the owner of that theory should gladfully dispense of it, in the pursuit of truth. Also, all theories should be treated (and tested) as equal. In light of these sceptical principles, I argue that many ‘conspiracy theories’ are perfectly in line with this spirit & that it is their rebuffers who are the ones adhering to a blind belief system. I can see no reason why a ‘conspiracy theory’ should not be treated with the same level of seriousness as any other theory. How arrogant it is of the self styled ‘know it all’s’ to guffaw & flippantly dismiss a ‘conspiracy theory’ as being absurd or impossible, just because it doesn’t fit their existing world view – that is totally out of step with the spirit of scepticism, scientific methodology, journalism & the pursuit of truth. I think that conspiracy theories bring a valid & defendable contribution to the debate & simply saying ‘oh what a bunch of crack pots’ whilst you smugly pat your ‘oh so clever’ self on the back, just shows not only an intellectual & sceptical flaw but also a questionable interest in the genuine pursuit of truth, no matter how uncomfortable that truth may be. Let us not forget that all ‘facts’ begin as theories & let us also not forget the countless great people throughout history that were once ridiculed (or tortured & killed) for promoting ideas that we all taken as granted today – such as the earth not being flat!

I think that when it comes to subjects such as 9/11 & JFK, for example, the conspiracy theorists & the mainstream academic/scientific & journalistic community are on an equal grounds for credibility because neither side really knows for SURE what actually happened – ALL parties are mere theorists on these subjects & the actual truth is only known by the people who were involved. And this is where the cracks in the fibre of the mainstream Scientific, academic & journalistic fields start to show – they end up falling back on ‘belief systems’ (the exact opposite of the values they profess to uphold), they start to utter things like ‘oh they never would have done that’ or ‘they never could have kept that a secret’ or ‘why would they want to do that’, ‘thats absurd’ etc etc. They can’t argue with the conspiracy research because much of it is actually more thorough than their own, so they have to just dismiss it as just being some kind of ‘youtube academia’ – as if that is a good enough response to questions they can’t answer. The reason they can’t argue with the research is because most of these subjects involve secrecy & when you don’t have full access to the tools of the experiment, you are only left with your own judgement in joining the dots as best you can – and this position is the same for BOTH sides of the debate. This is where pre-set belief systems rear their head & also a thing called ‘confirmation bias’ (where a person only see’s the things that confirm what they already think). If you believe that ‘they’re all bastards & are plotting against us’ then you’re only going to see the ‘facts’ that support that but also if you believe that ‘they never would have done that, there must be some other explanation’, you’re going to dismiss information that might be outside of your comfort zone. You might expect such things from layman journalism but not from professional, experienced researchers, scientists & academics. If they were able, like some kind of intellectual superman, to answer all of the ‘naive conspiracy buff’s’ questions with a definite & irrefutable explanation, then we’d all be able to join in the laughter at the preposterous notion of whatever ‘the conspiracy loons’ were saying. But they can’t, they merely laugh & say ‘oh, you’re so naive, how ridiculous, trot along little one’. I know that extreme claims require extreme evidence & it is in the hands of the theorist to bring supporting evidence – but many conspiracy theorists DO & their evidence & research has not actually be credibly refuted. I know it is difficult to disprove something when you don’t have access to all of the facts & again, in areas involving government secrecy etc, this is the main problem, but that is exactly my point, the conspiracy debunkers have no more ‘special inside information’ than anyone else, so they are merely drawing different ‘judgements’ from the scant info that IS available. Just dismissing the NOTION of a conspiracy, is simply just expressing a belief system & is not the same as responding to the questions on an academic level. Also, I am not saying that I necessarily ‘believe’ any of these conspiracy theories – it is not about belief – but as a sceptic, I give equal time to all opinions on a subject – rather than arrogantly dismissing those that don’t fit my existing world view. Those that do that are not seeking truth, they are seeking confirmation of what they already believe.

Sadly, until all of the information on a certain subject comes out, we will never know the absolute truth & I think it would be tasteful if all sides of the debates would exercise some humility in appreciating that. Was 911 an inside job? There are a ton of very legitimate questions about the official story of 911 & anyone that says otherwise is exercising extreme confirmation bias & being incredibly naive. However, there is also a ton of credible scientific data on the subject which rebuffs many conspiracy theorists’ claims. The truth is, neither side really knows. If you believe in the pursuit of actual TRUTH, regardless of how comfortable that truth makes you feel, you would give these questions a serious listen. One way to get to the truth of a subject is to have ALL of the information & when you’re dealing with secret societies (which do exist) for example, that is impossible by its very nature. The rest of us, conspiracy theorists, academics, scientists, etc are all just theorists in the same boat, joining up the available dots to form different pictures based on our pre-set beliefs. Only a few people really KNOW what the truth is – those who were involved. ALL of the rest of us should appreciate that we DONT really know & probably never will. So I think that the snobbery around conspiracies should know its place. I for one, read conspiracy literature alongside mainstream scientific & academic works & treat them with just as much credibility. Anyone claiming to have a genuine interest in the pursuit of truth, should do the same – or else you are merely expressing a brand of blind faith not too dis-similar to that of your religious counterparts. I think it shows a strength of intellect to appreciate that just maybe, we don’t actually know everything & that to exercise some humility with your views is healthy.

Having now ‘fought their corner’ though, I must say that ALL of the above also applies to my conspiracy buff friends who blindly follow their chosen messiah’s of truth & treat their conspiracy books like a bible – a ready made book of answers to all questions ever! All seekers of truth should seek out information that challenges their belief system, not confirm it.

#jameskennedy #kyshera #konic #conspiracy #theory #icke #infowars #government #politics #illuminati

0 notes

damefriday-blog · 6 years

Text

Free universities: The Greek experience

People ask me why I came to England. My coming here always seems to puzzle them, especially after I declare I’m from Greece. There are multiple answers I can use, depending on who I’m talking to or my mood: I came here to study; I came here because Greece has pretty much sunk to the bottom of the Mediterranean from shame and debt; I came here because I’ve wanted to live in this country since I first started learning English. But the truth of the matter is that I came here because my parents paid for it.

In the beginning of Pride and Prejudice and Zombies the audience learns that it is considered fashionable for noble families to send their progeny to China or Japan to learn the art of war. And so, in a similar fashion, Greek families of means send their children abroad for an MA, MSc, PhD and then boast about it, trying to explain to their friends what their child is doing, even though they have no clue what they’re spending a considerable amount of money on. But this is the elite we’re talking about. What about the majority? In this post, I would like to discuss how free, higher education in Greece has shaped society and how its members treat each other.

So, going to uni in Greece is free; and it’s probably because of that fact that it’s also a given. Once you finish high school and survive the Panhellenic examination, the grades you receive will secure you a place. Only then can you submit your list of prospective unis to your school. In Greece, you apply for subjects rather than universities. The subject is more important than where you study it. Most people don’t get their first choice but everyone goes somewhere. It might be the dumbest subject in a uni that’s based in buttfuck nowhere* and they will still go because they need a degree in something. Apparently, it’s better to have a degree in chicken breeding than no degree at all.

If you don’t go to university, you are considered the lowest of the low, uneducated, qualified only for manual labour. People assume you were too dumb and lazy for even the shittiest university. The irony of the matter is that finishing uni, no matter which school it is, law or interior decorating, odds are you will end up unemployed. As a country, we export oil, fruit, wine and scientists. My sister is a clinical nutritionist, currently focused on her MSc at Glasgow university, dreading the thought of going back to our parents without having secured a job. I helped a friend who studied medicine find a position here by translating the CV she submitted. She now works in London as a plastic surgeon. My best friend from school is in New York, working as an engineer, while another one is in Denmark studying and working to support herself through it.

Finding out that people in the UK have the option to not go to uni, without the stigma attached, was quite a shock for me. A few months ago, I took part in a research conducted by the HR department at work. They wanted to talk to young professionals, people under thirty, and discuss what works well for them, what’s challenging and how they, as an institution, could improve. I went, less because I had something to contribute and more because I was interested to see who was going to turn up and what they were going to say. No person in the room, except for me, had been to uni. Most of them had gotten their job through apprenticeships. They seemed very professional, goal focused people who knew what they wanted: a career in local government, a house and lots of work friends. One girl said she’s so glad she didn’t go to uni, which I thought was really sad. She was in her early twenties, talking about how much money skipping higher education has saved her and how in a couple of years she’d be able to buy a house. The others smiled and shook their heads as she went on counting the many benefits of working for local government. After I left, I still couldn’t decide whether I felt sad for her, because uni is great and people shouldn’t have to turn it down because they can’t afford it, or it was the Greek, prejudiced, mean snob inside me pitying the uneducated person. I want to believe that I’m better than this.

For the sake of avoiding any confusion I just need to clarify: I am not comparing Greek universities to British ones. Greece has neither the funds nor the infrastructure to compete with Britain, where higher education is a major source of revenue for the country. No one would pay to attend a Greek university. There are perks to entering uni in my home country though: you receive all your books for free (I got both volumes of the Norton anthology English literature, plus the Norton theory and Criticism on my first semester – all three are offered on Amazon for the price of £109.33) and you can apply for university accommodation which is also provided free of charge. The rooms are tiny but you can hardly be picky when your parents can’t properly support you. And as I’ve already stressed, you need to finish your degree in order not to be treated like the black sheep of the family.

I don’t like the fact that in my country, people can shame other people over their degree, or the lack of one. Most parents want their child to become a lawyer or a doctor or a computer engineer; a career that swallows your life to the point where you define yourself by your job. My best friend’s dad asked me once why i didn’t apply for law school, given that my grades were so high. He said medical school and law school are the only options distinguished students should consider. He was genuinely surprised when I told him that it never even crossed my mind to apply. No one ever pressured me to either and I am thankful for that. At the age of sixteen/ seventeen, when you are supposed to make this sort of choice, you can be uniquely vulnerable and susceptible to your parents’ suggestions. Lots of people I know went after the course their parents wished them to pursue. I wanted to go to Film school, become a writer and film director. I used to fantasize about who I would thank at the Oscars when I won the Best foreign film and Best original screenplay award. My parents said no. I fought back. We met in the middle: I went to study English literature and was shipped off to England for my MA Creative Writing. They paid and I’m grateful.

Education should be free and available to everyone; that is a fact and I fully support it and believe in it. The UK might have some of the greatest universities in the world but what is the point if people can’t access them because of the price tag? Choosing between being in debt for the better part of your life and starting a life without this massive burden on your shoulder is a tough choice to make when you’re seventeen years old; no one should have to do that. Going to uni is not for everyone but the choice whether to go or not shouldn’t be influenced by the cost. You don’t have to go to uni to be intelligent or well-read or politically conscious. Plenty of people come out of uni with prestigious degrees and an empty head.

Having said all that, I can’t help but wonder: should universities in the UK were free, would a similar situation to the one in Greece arise? Because right now, I think there’s plenty of snobbery to go around in Britain as it is.

*there is this amazing Greek expression, equivalent to buttfuck nowhere, that I felt I needed to share with you: kolopetinitsa. The literal translation is: village in the rooster’s ass. Isn’t the Greek language a gift to humanity?

#Greece #universities #british university #education #free education #recession #unemployment #life after college #greek educational system #uni courses #'subjects #humanities #science

0 notes