How important is knowing how to do basic writing and literary composition in academia?
>>8020030
>basic
lmao
You'll need to do better than that.
Framing things in terms of the existing literature and current fad concepts are important.
It is incredibly important to be able to say exactly what you mean and do so in manner that cannot be misconstrued. Try to be clear and concise, depending on what you're working with clarity can prevent harm.
>>8020043
Wrong
It's more important to be able to obfuscate bullshit so you can amass funding while no one calls you out
See Mochizuki for example
>>8020048
You seem to be mistaken, I was talking about science.
But you bring up a good point with more subjective things like math, english, and the arts, I suppose you might be better off with using flowery language with no meaning.
>>8020030
who can eat this garbage without feeling like complete shit?
>>8020084
looks good to me
stop being a little autistic fucking bitch m8
>>8020048
That's not what Mochizuki does; you just don't know any of the definitions he uses.
>>8020065
Science writers do not, in my experience, use flowery language to get funding. They just lie. For example, a physics Ph.D wrote a lengthy proposal in which he claimed he could do Coherant Anti-Stokes Raman spectroscopy on any compound. This is not true, some compounds do not work with CARS. He still got funding for a year before people caught on to his bullshit.
Also, if you want to see more examples of people lying, read patents. A good chunk of them are exaggerated at best, made up bullshit at worst.
>>8020030
Very important in my opinion. Apart from making your research/reports easier to read thanks to articulate language, there's just something about well-thought and carefully chosen words in one's phrasing that gives their paper more trustworthiness and authority than papers with very poor vocabulary where you often struggle to understand what the authors mean.
Short answer: l2write well
>>8020043
This, while also having a text that is pleasant to read and doesn't complicate things more
>>8020030
It is important.
In fact it is important to go beyond the basic and be very good in composition, rhetoric, writing and oral presentation.
If you are on the basic level people will not listen to you and will not give you funding. And flowery language is no good substitute for good writing.
In fact you wish to be read by many who do not have English as their native language so you'd better write clearly.
>>8020030
Maybe I'm dead wrong, but don't writing and literary composition involve the same kind of ability as applied math? Both are just working with a code.
>>8020030
>raw meat
>>8020746
>not enjoying beef sashimi
>>8020746
if the inside of your steak needs cooking, you're buying shit steak
>>8020754
That looks amazing
>>8020198
>>8020198
>Also, if you want to see more examples of people lying, read patents. A good chunk of them are exaggerated at best, made up bullshit at worst.
This is true. If you ever look through organic chem procedures found on SciFinder that are also patents, you'll see things like 100% reported yields and other sketchiness.
>>8020179
That's exactly what I'm talking about
>>8020030
It's pretty much the foundation of academia man.
Being able to write clearly and well is pretty much the single most important skill you could possibly have in academia regardless of your field.
>>8022852
It's not obfuscation though. Either the definitions appear somewhere in the work, are cited in another work, or are common knowledge to anyone working in the field.
>>8020030
Not at all.
Every engineer just has to graduate undergrad to get 600K starting
