Philosphy prof submits 'gibberish' to academic journal, academic reviewers deem it 'outstanding.' (interview, global warming)

[wutitiz]

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2017/0...ed-hoax-study/


A Portland State U. philosophy prof and a mathematician teamed to submit a paper on gender studies.

After completing the paper, we read it carefully to ensure it didn’t say anything meaningful, and as neither one of us could determine what it is actually about, we deemed it a success.

Here is a sample quote from the paper (from the above link):

Inasmuch as masculinity is essentially performative, so too is the conceptual p****. The p****, in the words of Judith Butler, “can only be understood through reference to what is barred from the signifier within the domain of corporeal legibility” (Butler, 1993). The p**** should not be understood as an honest expression of the performer’s intent should it be presented in a performance of masculinity or hypermasculinity. Thus, the isomorphism between the conceptual....

(asterisks inserted by me because I am not sure it would make it through the CD filters).

The funniest part is that the prof linked all of this to global warming in the paper. I heard him interviewed, and he explained how the peer review process works. A paper is submitted and sent out to 20 or 30 experts in the field (in this case gender studies) who read it and comment. The paper generally received positive reviews, with one expert calling it "outstanding" in every applicable category"

[T-310]

Standard garbage of treat idiots like mushrooms by keeping them in the dark and feeding them crap.

[blanker]

LOL. I love it when people do stuff like this. Hats off.

[greywar]

Theres a lot of places that are just publishing mills. I could write one on my specialty, and no matter how good or bad it would get published. Then on my resume suddenly I am a published expert in the field.