|
@context_ing | |||||
|
Yes, there’s some jargon. But, kinda has to be. It’s like a “key”. They are needed.
1. Indexicality
2. Reflexivity
3. Accountability
Then some of the others help; situated practice, orderliness, etc. but, they’re not as integral as the above. I don’t think it’s a tall order.
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Indexical Banana
@literalbanana
|
21. pro |
|
A psychedelic experience that I HIGHLY recommend is to read a lot of ethnomethodology over the course of several days and then go to Costco on the Friday afternoon before Christmas
|
||
|
|
||
|
Deep
@InspiredBuddha
|
21. pro |
|
Any recommended links to check on ethno
|
||
|
|
||
|
VidFlumina
@VidFlumina
|
21. pro |
|
Currently watching this intro and it's making a lot of sense so far: youtu.be/6cBChObsKOw
|
||
|
|
||
|
Lucy Keer
@drossbucket
|
21. pro |
|
Might give this a go. Is one hour explanation for every two paragraphs of Garfinkel the going rate? That would explain why that pulsar paper was such hard going.
|
||
|
|
||
|
David Chapman
@Meaningness
|
21. pro |
|
There’s two obstacles to understanding.
The interesting one is that you need to flip the way you see EVERYTHING inside out.
The annoying one is learning the jargon. But that is not a big deal; the jargon is weird, but relative to any science field there’s not much of it.
|
||
|
|
||
|
ryan
@context_ing
|
21. pro |
|
I don’t think it’s THAT jargon heavy to be able to _do it_. Majority of the jargon is just philosophy on how it’s done like that and why - almost a justification (which is interesting, in a way, but distracting).
|
||
|
|
||
|
ryan
@context_ing
|
21. pro |
|
While the discussions about objectification (see especially Liberman’s chapter on coffee tasting), etc is utterly fascinating — it’s not really needed to go to the supermarket and have your worldview turned upside down (as per OP).
|
||
|
|
||