When science goes gibberish; what does it indicate?

[Riverwolf]

So you're a recovering snooty elitist, eh.
Tis good to improve with age.

Pretty much. ^_^

I'm prone to using archaic words and expressions, I've been accused of making words up, a few teachers have had to ask me what certain words mean, and it's just something I do without any mental effort, save for those plebeians who annoy me and I find myself going to extra lengths to make those who have hippopotomonstrosesquippedaliophobia run for the hills.
Actually, since school, I've been making an effort to try and take it down a few notches.

Funny how that works. I don't think I've ever had teachers ask me what words mean, but I did once think I was so much smarter than my teacher because she obviously didn't know what Eurasia was and I did (yes she did, while I was actually thinking of Laurasia, the old super-continent, at the time. DX)

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Funny how that works. I don't think I've ever had teachers ask me what words mean, but I did once think I was so much smarter than my teacher because she obviously didn't know what Eurasia was and I did (yes she did, while I was actually thinking of Laurasia, the old super-continent, at the time. DX)

I had an English and journalist teacher tell me that I want to make it as a writer, I really need to focus on making things easier to read, and assume my audience doesn't have the background knowledge in the ideas and concepts that I write about. I struggle greatly with trying to decide what information is common knowledge and does not require citation, and information that is not common knowledge and must be cited. So I'd just hand in 1 1/2 - 2 page long reference pages because I usually got it wrong when trying to guess.

 

[sun rise]

I had an English and journalist teacher tell me that I want to make it as a writer, I really need to focus on making things easier to read, and assume my audience doesn't have the background knowledge in the ideas and concepts that I write about. I struggle greatly with trying to decide what information is common knowledge and does not require citation, and information that is not common knowledge and must be cited. So I'd just hand in 1 1/2 - 2 page long reference pages because I usually got it wrong when trying to guess.

To me this is a tricky area. If you're writing a science fiction story, you can assume that the vast majority of your readers have a background with SF concepts and a decent understanding of science. Fantasy stories have their own vocabulary of magic. And so forth. And writers also joke about their own travails:

 

[jojom]

What I find amusing, in a pathetic sense, are those who seemingly have an understanding of an esoteric subject and then use its jargon or use arcane concepts to purposely talk over the heads of their audience. They don't care their audience perceives it as gibberish, but that they can feel superior by understanding what they don't. The big ego feeding. It reminds me of this scene in "Good Will Hunting."

In fact, I have seen such people almost seek out those unschooled in their area of "expertise" specifically for this purpose. And this need not be significant expertise, or even true expertise, just sufficiently more learning than their audience so as show off their knowledge.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

To me this is a tricky area. If you're writing a science fiction story, you can assume that the vast majority of your readers have a background with SF concepts and a decent understanding of science. Fantasy stories have their own vocabulary of magic. And so forth. And writers also joke about their own travails:

Sci-fi writing is one I enjoy as I can go full-throttle into deeper issues, lavish in incorporating science theories and ideas, and relish the idea of speculating potential possibilities. I also enjoy doing the research to make sure things aren't too far off-base. And reading/watching Michio Kaku is always a delightful learning experience. Working out Death Stars, teleportation, energy shields...how can people not be fascinated by that stuff?
I just hate coming up with names for characters and other stuff.

 

[LuisDantas]

@jojom : I suspect it is not rare or unusual for people to be too enamoured of the words to realize that they have little to say.

Some specific areas seem to thrive on that. Law immediately springs to mind.

 

[Thief]

Open for discussion for the Theists and the Atheists alike.
Regards

Been watching science documentaries....and...it's gone bad.

Some experiments are chalkboard only.
The desired experiment won't fit in the petri dish.

So conceptual ideas stay that way.
Time....space....travel to far away places....

Like the guy who wants to believe all is fixed and your will has nothing to do about it.
He claims to demonstrate by ordering lunch.
No matter what you told the waiter.....you don't know what you get until it lands on your table.
I then suppose he has a problem with waiters that bring the wrong plate.

I suppose I would too.

but that doesn't mean his science follows that line of thought.

 

[jojom]

@jojom : I suspect it is not rare or unusual for people to be too enamoured of the words to realize that they have little to say.

I don't think it's rare either. From time to time I've seen it pop up on other discussion sites.

 

[MormonChainMonteCarlo]

the sass on page 1 tho

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I had an English and journalist teacher tell me that I want to make it as a writer, I really need to focus on making things easier to read, and assume my audience doesn't have the background knowledge in the ideas and concepts that I write about. I struggle greatly with trying to decide what information is common knowledge and does not require citation, and information that is not common knowledge and must be cited. So I'd just hand in 1 1/2 - 2 page long reference pages because I usually got it wrong when trying to guess.

My advice would be to disregard that advice, to some degree.
I have done some decent writing, back in the day, and have a couple of friends who are damn good writers. A novelist/lecturer praised my very clean narrative style, and said it was perfect for short stories, or journalistic/non-fiction work. Whereas both my friends were a damn site better at descriptive narratives than I was. Effectively, I could paint a scene in your head, but my friends would get you inside the characters better.

It could simply be that your teachers background lends him/her to preferring a clean, concise narrative style. There are plenty of published writers who don't follow that method, and ultimately you need to find your own Voice if you're going to write anything decent anyway.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

When science goes gibberish, it often indicates that Beaker is in the house. Consider the following evidence;

 

[Looncall]

I find it interesting that most people have claimed that when 'science talks gibberish' it is because the reader doesn't understand. The 'science' is right, it's just the reader that is wrong.

Of course this is an issue, but in many areas termed 'science' much if not most of material published in academic journals is wrong.

When scientists talk gibberish it is frequently due to things such as poor methodology, poor mathematics (especially statistics and probability), deliberate misrepresentation for professional or financial advancement and wishful thinking.

In terms of language though, scientists aren't half as bad as other academics who tend to use the most complex way possible to explain a simple concept just to affect an image of sophistication. Can't remember who it was but someone said something along the lines of 'the value of an academic discipline is inversely proportional to how long a layman can talk about it before the expert realises the layman doesn't know what they are talking about'.

A good post. Especially as some fields make a virtue of gibberish these days. Post-modernist writing comes to mind. Remember the hilarious Sokal incident?

 

[Politesse]

A good post. Especially as some fields make a virtue of gibberish these days. Post-modernist writing comes to mind. Remember the hilarious Sokal incident?

Irony: Agreeing with someone that we should be concerned about methodology, statistics, and deliberate misrepresentation in the sciences, then citing a "hilarious" incident in which a single, intentionally fraudulent article published in a non-peer reviewed journal was taken to prove that the entirety of the postmodernist movement was valueless.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It could simply be that your teachers background lends him/her to preferring a clean, concise narrative style. There are plenty of published writers who don't follow that method, and ultimately you need to find your own Voice if you're going to write anything decent anyway.

I wasn't referring to creative writing. Print journalism I do not like doing because it has to be short, overly concise, and it is very difficult for me. Writing a book that I would want to be read by more people than those who have are well educated and/or well read would require at least more explanations that what I would normally give. Kinda like how with Nietzsche you either know all the philosophers and their ideas he criticizes, or you have to take some time to educate yourself about them. I have an excellent writing style, am very organized, but it's the reading level those teachers were referring to.
Creative writing is just taking me a while to get back into gear for creative writing while down shifting from academic writing (I'm a huge fan of Lovecraft, so unusual wordings and sentences are something I use myself).

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I wasn't referring to creative writing. Print journalism I do not like doing because it has to be short, overly concise, and it is very difficult for me. Writing a book that I would want to be read by more people than those who have are well educated and/or well read would require at least more explanations that what I would normally give. Kinda like how with Nietzsche you either know all the philosophers and their ideas he criticizes, or you have to take some time to educate yourself about them. I have an excellent writing style, am very organized, but it's the reading level those teachers were referring to.
Creative writing is just taking me a while to get back into gear for creative writing while down shifting from academic writing (I'm a huge fan of Lovecraft, so unusual wordings and sentences are something I use myself).

My bad. I made an assumption you meant creative writing, since I know you have mentioned writing in that style before. I've never tried factual writing for a broad audience, only ever for a targeted audience, but I think it would be very challenging to get the pitch right, in terms of assumed understandings.

 

[Nakosis]

Open for discussion for the Theists and the Atheists alike.
Regards

Science has learned to speak in tongues?

 

[Nakosis]

There are also other possibilities...
- Intentional gibberish
Science publisher fooled by gibberish papers
- The pseudo scientist, eg, quantum quackery, quantum mysticism, Deepak Chopra
- An academic tendency towards verbosity & arcane language.

"The peer-review system is the best system we have so far and this incident will lead to additional measures on the part of Springer to strengthen it."

So much for peer review. People get lazy and just sign off without actually reviewing. Especially easy if the reviewer has no real understand of the technical details. Just put some big technical words in the first few sentences and their eyes glaze over, and they'll quickly just sign off.

This was done by a computer but that doesn't mean it can't be done by some devious folks looking for a grant.

 

[Revoltingest]

"The peer-review system is the best system we have so far and this incident will lead to additional measures on the part of Springer to strengthen it."

So much for peer review. People get lazy and just sign off without actually reviewing. Especially easy if the reviewer has no real understand of the technical details. Just put some big technical words in the first few sentences and their eyes glaze over, and they'll quickly just sign off.

This was done by a computer but that doesn't mean it can't be done by some devious folks looking for a grant.

Eternal vigilance!

 

[Awkward Fingers]

Have we gotten an example of the "gibberish" the OP is talking about, so we can evaluate yet?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Pretty much. ^_^



Funny how that works. I don't think I've ever had teachers ask me what words mean, but I did once think I was so much smarter than my teacher because she obviously didn't know what Eurasia was and I did (yes she did, while I was actually thinking of Laurasia, the old super-continent, at the time. DX)

Any teacher who gets upset when their student shows more knowledge than them in a particular sphere is missing the point of their profession.