Page 128 - Smart Thinking: Skills for Critical Understanding and Writing, 2nd Ed
P. 128

RESEARCH, REASONING, AND ANALYSIS  11 5

      context in which it was produced. In other words, information from indirect
      sources is only as good as our understanding of that source itself. For example, as a
      result of changes over the past two decades, an academic commentary such as the
      one by James on advertising in the 1970s may not be precisely relevant to con-
      temporary concerns. There is no general rule to apply to such analysis of sources,
      except that we must always think about the context (who obtained the information;
      when, where, and how the information was arrived at) as well as the text (what the
      information is).
         For example, imagine you are watching a television program on advertising.
      The host makes some comments on nationalistic commercials, saying that they
      always produce an emotional reaction and that is why they are effective. Is this
      source useful for an academic investigation? If you answered no, then you would,
      in some circumstances, be correct. But the important question to ask is 'Why?'. Let
      us contrast this hypothetical television program with a more usual source: academic
      writing. The trustworthiness of academic writing is based on the idea that the
      person doing the writing is an expert in that area, through their close study of the
      topic, their skills as a researcher, their careful, long-term analysis, and their involve-
      ment in a system in which articles and books are published only after the scrutiny
      of other qualified academics to determine if they are 'right' or not. In other words,
      the claims are trustworthy because an institutionalised method makes them trust-
      worthy. It is a social convention that academic work is regarded as being more
      'sound' (if often more remote) than 'popular' work; it is also a worthwhile social
      convention because there are good reasons to accept this distinction in soundness.
         The usefulness of the television program depends, however, on what exactly we
      are trying to find. It might be quite relevant to argue that the popular perception of
      nationalist advertising is very important in the effectiveness of such commercials.
      So, even if we distrust many of the claims that are advanced in the popular media
      and trust those from more scholarly work instead, we can still use as evidence the
      fact that people do actually make and listen to the first sort of claim. In other
      words, while we may not trust the television program as an indirect commentary
      on advertising, we could certainly use it as a direct source of popular views on
      advertising.
         Do you see the difference? Sometimes we will want to make claims in our
      reasoning that convey information in the claims themselves. And sometimes we
      will want to make claims about the fact that a certain type of claim, or group of
      claims, has been made by others. Developing the latter type of writing is essential
      in good critical work and, thus, requires you to develop skills in knowing about
      sources of knowledge.

      Exercise 8.3

      Write a short analysis of the different direct and indirect sources that you use
      most frequently in your current reasoning. What questions do you need to ask
      about them? What rules and assumptions, stemming from the discipline or
   123   124   125   126   127   128   129   130   131   132   133