blog traffic analysis
This is Previous-Essay <== This-Essay ==> Following-Essay Click HERE on this line to find essays via Your-Key-Words. {Most frequent wordstarts of each essay will be put here.} ========================================================== %PROFESSOR SCHOLAR ANALYSIS SPECIALIZE NARROW+941201 %CONTEXTUAL ENVIRONMENT 941201 Scholars are often fixated upon analysis of the objects of their attention into their elementary parts in efforts to understand the whole in terms of its parts. Often to scholars to understand is synonymous with taking a whole apart, to see the whole in terms of its parts. The objects of scholar's attention are often treated objectively with detachment---in keeping with the process of depersonalization and fragmentation which is central to scholarly analysis. Scientific scholars add to analysis the quantitative processes of measurement, enumeration and computation. To many scientific scholars a work is not worthy of respect and attention if it is lacking in quantitative measurements, enumerations or computations. This means that the quantity and sophistication of graphs, equations and computer processing is the most important measure of the value of a bit of scholarly work. Scientific scholars seek to validate the value of scholarly work in terms of objective measurements of its conformity to objective standards of evaluation. Conformity to objective standards entails consensus regarding merits, and so there must be references to respected scholars in order to demonstrate that the work at hand fits into the pattern of conformity to the respected paradigm and previous publications. Thus the major criteria used in evaluation of the merit of a scholarly work is often how many references it makes to other scholarly works, and how often it is referred to by subsequent scholarly works. The relevance of the scholarship to the human experiences of many people is often irrelevant to the process of validating the worth of a scholarly work. The quantity and quality of scholarly references is regarded as the primary criteria in the process of validation. CONTEXTUAL UNDERSTANDING is not often a primary concern of scholars. The articulation of how an insight, perception, vision, dream, hope, desire, person, work, or other creature or creation fits into a larger whole---is not as respectable as are attempts to analyze, understand, predict and control through fragmentation of wholes into perceived elementary parts. There is no generally used single word or word pair to point to such an integrative articulation. In the absence of a word or phrase which points to integrative articulations, the word "analysis" is often used---with confusing connotations. We need to balance FRAGMENTIVE ANALYSIS with a healthy dose of CONTEXTUAL UNDERSTANDING if we and our communities are to enjoy personal and communal integrity. FRAGMENTIVE ANALYSIS is not the best or only way to move toward personal and communal integrity. (c) 2005 by Paul A. Smith in (On Being Yourself, Whole and Healthy) ==========================================================