It is surprising (or is it unsurprising?) how many not-very-overlapping citation networks the same sort of subject can support, both within and across disciplines.
Unsurprising. Who has time to read papers written by people they don't even know?
But Moby, the pursuit of knowledge is a catholic enterprise.
2: I suppose, but the pursuit of knowledge involves so much IRBing, e-mailing, cat herding, and, how-is-that-an-analysis-planning that you can get exhausted before you've gotten to any of the good knowledge.
That sure is an old journal article you're posting about.
I'm reminiscing about freshman year of high school.
Same here, but this time Rachel Weisz is the gym teacher.
5: Pshaw. I've posted about journal articles from the nineteenth century. Why, just yesterday I did a post about an article from 1936 that I had already done an earlier post on.
9: The consultant detailing the new sexual harassment policy.
10: We're going to have to assemble a committee to vet prospective posts for sufficient novelty.
All posts should be peer reviewed prior to publication, really.
When I think about paragliding, I feel an adrenaline sting, though a small one. I would compare it to the blush that accompanies bad memories of high school.
However, it might be fair to say that nosflow is without peer.
Whenever I think about exercise, I think about lying down until I think the urge has gone away.
13: In the new world of new media, peer review happens after the fact. You publish and then let the crowd determine the rest!
Perhaps he prefers "theorisation". That Anglophile, essear.
I also expect "dynamic systems" to have something to do with differential equations, or else some sort of iterated map, but apparently not.
21: It's no praxis, I'll tell you that much.
22: actually, you're not far off in some respects; one of the first few chapters (two? three?) of this book would reveal this.
I went with "theorization" over "theory" because it seemed apter to describe what I was exposed to as the working up, explication, and application of the theory in light of various studies: not the finished static product but its development and use.
24.1: Huh. I saw that on Google Books, but scrolling through I didn't see any equations, so I assumed it meant something else altogether by the phrase.
Huh. What I am able to see of Ch. 3 reads like Sokal-esque fakery to me.
22: I saw what looked like a lunge at an iterated map, essaer.
Really, the attempts to find parallels to physical sciences for their approach in child development seems unnecessary (though it might be true that there is an etiological connection).
I've mentioned before that I have a cousin who does breast augmentation through hypnosis.
Or quitting smoking. I'm not a physiologist, but I met a couple of cousin Billy's girlfriends. They could well have been graduates of both programs.
30: Does said cousin hypnotize the, e.g., wife, or the, e.g., husband?
I think it means CC's uncle can do breast enlargement surgery while he himself is hypnotized.
This seems like a good idea, but if somebody wants to see if it works to control the spread of STDs, don't volunteer for the study.