Wednesday, May 06, 2009


CR中大本社 說: tomoro 公共知識分子訪問

X 說:hahaha, interesting

CR中大本社 說:reviewing SY's notes; not to be "公共知識分子" is hard it is too seductive

X 說:i think it is about your attitude, not about the labelling.if you want to do sth good for the public, you'll be a "公共知識分子". if you just want to get high with yourself, to hell "公共知識分子".

CR中大本社 說:too long to repeat sy's arguments on "professional academic freedonm" and 'public intellectual"his point is that many arguments are quite contextual (and surely power-related)

X 說:客觀環境很大程度不能掌握。作為一篇個人訪問而非社會政治分析,讀者祈望看到的是受訪者個人如何看待對「公共知識分子」的取態。

CR中大本社 說:um i think so. so depends on the type of readers and the interviewer as well
i think similar to who is "電車男" defination debate la. qute useless lor. so also need to analyze the context as well

X 說:i think 'public intellectuals' is quite well defined.... at least in the understanding of the general public.
just like denshaotoko.

CR中大本社 說:agree
然後你們的人要威 but 又不想要所承擔的負面image/ 責任

X 說:so in my view, down to the bottom, it's still all about personal moral attitude

CR中大本社 說:yeah

X 說:haha, for the public, one hardly knows what scholar is saying. everyone accept that. everyone have the image of Einstein with his crazy hair when speak of 'professors'. so, the only thing they can demand the intellectuals/academics, is they speak truthfully and they want to do good.that's why we hate XXX and XXX, not really becoz they are pleasing the public, but becoz they are not honest.

CR中大本社 說:ummmm i am thinking somthing similar on your last point, but still can't express it and logically articulate it clearly

X 說:mm...

CR中大本社 說:we hate , because1) not honest, cos2) by using the name of the public to win students and academic fame3) by using the name of the professional to be elitist among the publici.e. having the worst things in both worlds

CR中大本社 說:or in sum

X 說:oh suddenly i want to go back to the defintions
being 'public intellectual' or 'academic', the almost only function is to throw light on the public sth they dont know. by reversing to reinforce what the public already BELIEVES so as to please them, these guys have cut all grounds of being a 'public intellectual'. and their acts of doing so weaken the authority of 'public intellecutal' and their

X 說:the abitliy of those other true academics of speaking out those things the public cant understand yet still repescts.

CR中大本社 說:
酸氣 = public intellectual (outside instution)
腐氣 = academics (withint institution)
Said : "speaking truth to power" ma

X 說:yeah they are actually salesman, their only aim is 搵餐晏仔/做好呢份工. although the only reason why they are interviewed or have newspaper printing their article or have their book publish is because they are 'professors' / 'lecturers' -- and 'public intellectuals' because they are 'professors giving newspaper interviews', they hate the moral standard expected on these labels, and they think they are not bounded by such moral standards, because they are really not 'professors' / 'lecturers', but salesmen. Nobody expect salesmen to be honest, right? So, they are denied their 'trueself', and they cannot admit publicly because if the public found out they are salesman nobody would listen to them again so they cant even be salesmen, so they are in a very confused and refused mental condition

CR中大本社 說:haha. 如此複雜的topic, 我懷疑他們上次搞了那麽一大堆訪問,根本無人清楚明白自己up 什麽

X說:oh that's why the interviews can go on and on and on for weeks and monthsif in the first article everything is crystal clear, why need write next?

No comments: