DOCSLIB.ORG

Orientalism and the Postcolonial Predicament a Listing of the Books in This Series Appears at the Back of This Volume Perspectives on South Asia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Orientalism and the Postcolonial Predicament a Listing of the Books in This Series Appears at the Back of This Volume Perspectives on South Asia SOUTH ASIA SEMINAR SERIES Orientalism and the Postcolonial Predicament A listing of the books in this series appears at the back of this volume Perspectives on South Asia University of Pennsylvania Press NEW CULTURAL STUDIES Edited by Joan Dejean, Carroll Smith-Rosenberg, and Peter Stallybrass, Editors Carol A. Breckenridge A listing of the books in this series appears at the back of this volume and Peter van der Veer University of Pennsylvania Press Philadelphia Copyright © 1993 by the University of Pennsylvania Press Contents All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America Permission is acknowledged to reprint excerpts from published material: Georges Duby, "Histoire sociale et ideologies des societes," in Fain tie I'histoire: Nouveaux problimes, ed. Jacques le Goffand Pierre Nora. Paris: Gallimard, 1974. Also in Constructing Preface Vll the Past. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Translated by Sheldon Pollock. Library of Congress Cataloging- in-Publication Data Orientalism and the Postcolonial Predicament Carol A. Breckenridge ami Peter van der Veer Orientalism and the postcolonial predicament: perspectives on South Asia / edited by Carol A. Breckenridge and Peter van der Veer. p. cm. — (South Asia seminar series) (New cultural studies) Papers presented at the 44th Annual South Asia Seminar held at the University of Part I: The Postcolonial Predicament Pennsylvania, 1988/1989. and Contemporary History Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-8122-3168-6. — ISBN 0-8122-1436-6 (pbk.) 1. South Asia—Study and teaching—Congresses. 2. South Asia—Foreign public 1. The Foreign Hand: Orientalist Discourse in Sociology opinion, Occidental—Congresses. I. Breckenridge, Carol Appadurai, 1942- and Communalism II. Veer, Peter van der. III. South Asia Seminar (44th : 1988 : University of Peter van der Veer Pennsylvania). IV. Series. V. Series: New cultural studies. DS339.8.075 1993 954—dc2O 93-18290 2. Orientalism and the Social Sciences CIP Jayant Lele Second paperback printing 1994 3. Deep Orientalism? Notes on Sanskrit and Power Beyond the Raj Sheldon Pollock 76 4. The Burden of English Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak 134 No*.. 00826? 5. Orientalism and the Study of Indian Literattfres Vinay Dbarwadker Call 158 Part II: The Genealogy of the Postcolonial 6. The Fate of Hindustani: Colonial Knowledge and the Project of a National Language David Lelyveld 189 Number in the Colonial Imagination 315 book he suggests that in exhuming dead Oriental languages, orientalists Arjun Appadumi were involved in a process in which "reconstructive precision, science, even imagination could prepare the way for what armies, administrations, and bureaucracies would later do on the ground, in the Orient" (Said: 10. Number in the Colonial 123; emphasis mine). I want in this essay to show that the exercise of bureaucratic power Imagination itself involved the colonial imagination and that in this imagination num- ber played a crucial role. My general argument is that exoticization and enumeration were complicated strands of a single colonial project and that in their interaction lies a crucial part of the explanation of group violence In the latter part of 1990, in the last months of the regime of V. P. Singh and communal terror in contemporary India. In making this argument, it and in the turbulent transition to the rule of the country by S. Chandra- might be noted that I build on Ludden's concern with "orientalist empiri- sekhar, India (especially the Hindi-speaking North) was rocked by two cism" (in this volume). major social explosions. The first, associated with the Mandal Commission My central question is simple. Is there any special force to the system- Report, pitted members of different castes against each other in a manner atic counting of bodies under colonial states in India, Africa, and South- that many feared would destroy the polity. The second, associated with east Asia, or is it simply a logical extension of the preoccupation with the holy city of Ayodhya, pitted Hindus and Muslims against each other numbers in the metropolis, that is, in Europe in the sixteenth and seven- over the control of a sacred site. These crosscutting issues, whose interre- teenth centuries? In asking this question, and in seeking to answer it, I lationship has been noted and analyzed a great deal in recent months, both have been inspired by two essays: one by Benedict Anderson (1991) and involved questions of entitlement (what are your rights?) and of classifi- one by Sudipta Kaviraj (1989), which together suggest an important new cation (what group do you belong to and where does it fit in the political agenda for a critique of European colonial rule. Taking the Indian colonial landscape?). This chapter explores the colonial roots of one dimension of experience as my case, I shall try to elaborate the idea that we have paid a the volatile politics of community and classification in contemporary In- good deal of attention to the classificatory logic of colonial regimes, but dia. In so doing, it follows the lead of many recent authors who have less attention to the ways in which they employ quantification, in censuses traced caste and communitarian politics to the politics of group represen- as well as in various other instruments like maps, agrarian surveys, racial tation in the twentieth century (Kothari 1989a, 1989b; Shah 1989) as well studies, and a variety of other productions of the colonial archive. as to the role of the colonial census (Thapar 1989). But the precise and Let me briefly anticipate my argument. I believe that the British co- distinctive links between enumeration and classification in colonial India lonial state did employ quantification in its rule of the Indian subcontinent have not been specified, and that is what this essay proposes to do. in a way that was different from its domestic counterpart in the eighteenth Edward Said's famous book (1978) is centrally concerned with the century (Brewer 1989) and from its predecessor states in India, including forms of knowledge that constitute what he defined as orientalism, but he the Mughals, who certainly had elaborate apparatuses for counting, classi- does not specify how exactly the orientalist knowledge project and the fying, and controlling the large populations under their control. To make colonial project of domination and extraction were connected. Neverthe- this case, I make two arguments and raise a number of questions for fur- less, in two ways he does set the stage for the argument of this chapter. ther research. The first, more extensive, argument will seek to identify Discussing the various ways the discourse of orientalism created a vista of the place of quantification and enumeration in British classification activi- exoticism, strangeness, and difference, he says that: "Rhetorically speak- ties in colonial India. The second, only briefly adumbrated here, will sug- ing, Orientalism is absolutely anatomical and enumerative; to use its vo- gest why, contrary to appearance, this variety of "dynamic nominalism" cabulary is to engage in the particularizing and dividing of things Oriental (Hacking 1986) was different from earlier state-supported numerical exer- into manageable parts " (Said 1978: 72; emphasis mine). A little later in the cises both in the metropolis and in the colonies. 316 Arjun Appadurai Number in the Colonial Imagination 317 Enumerative Strategies Thus, though early colonial policies of quantification were utilitarian in design, I would suggest that numbers gradually became more impor- Much has been written about the virtual obsession of the British state in tantly part of the illusion of bureaucratic control and a key to a colonial India with classifying its Indian population. The locus dassicus of this lit- imaginaire in which countable abstractions, both of people and of re- erature is Bernard Cohn's essay "The Census and Objectification in South sources, at every imaginable level and for every conceivable purpose, cre- Asia" (1987; original 1984; original manuscript version 1970), where he ated the sense of a controllable indigenous reality. Numbers were part of shows that the Indian census, rather than being a passive instrument of the recent historical experience of literacy for the colonial elite (Money data-gathering, creates, by its practical logic and form, a new sense of 1989; Thomas 1987), who had thus come to believe that quantification was category-identity in India, which in turn creates the conditions for new socially useful. There is ample evidence that the significance of these num- strategies of mobility, status politics, and electoral struggle in India. The bers was often cither nonexistent or self-fulfilling, rather than principally dassificatory dimension of Cohn's work has been carried forward by many referential with regard to a complex reality external to the activities of the scholars, including Nicholas Dirks (1987), David Ludden (this volume), colonial state. In the long run, these enumerative strategies helped to ig- Gyan Prakash (1990), and several historians of the subaltern school, in- nite communitarian and nationalist identities that in fact undermined cluding Guha (1983), Arnold (1988), and Chakrabarty (1983). It has also colonial rule. One must therefore ask how the idea of number as an instru- recently been resituated in a major study of the orientalist imagination in ment of colonial control might have entered the imagination of the state? India (Inden 1990). Cohn's concern with the census has also been
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Debate Association & Debate Speech National ©
    © National SpeechDebate & Association DEBATE 101 Everything You Need to Know About Policy Debate: You Learned Here Bill Smelko & Will Smelko DEBATE 101 Everything You Need to Know About Policy Debate: You Learned Here Bill Smelko & Will Smelko © NATIONAL SPEECH & DEBATE ASSOCIATION DEBATE 101: Everything You Need to Know About Policy Debate: You Learned Here Copyright © 2013 by the National Speech & Debate Association All rights reserved. Published by National Speech & Debate Association 125 Watson Street, PO Box 38, Ripon, WI 54971-0038 USA Phone: (920) 748-6206 Fax: (920) 748-9478 [email protected] No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, now known or hereafter invented, including electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, information storage and retrieval, or otherwise, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without the prior written permission of the Publisher. The National Speech & Debate Association does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, age, gender identity, gender expression, affectional or sexual orientation, or disability in any of its policies, programs, and services. Printed and bound in the United States of America Contents Chapter 1: Debate Tournaments . .1 . Chapter 2: The Rudiments of Rhetoric . 5. Chapter 3: The Debate Process . .11 . Chapter 4: Debating, Negative Options and Approaches, or, THE BIG 6 . .13 . Chapter 5: Step By Step, Or, It’s My Turn & What Do I Do Now? . .41 . Chapter 6: Ten Helpful Little Hints . 63. Chapter 7: Public Speaking Made Easy .
    [Show full text]
  • Participating in a Policy Debate Program and Academic Achievement Among At-Risk Adolescents in an Urban Public School District: 1997–2007
    Journal of Adolescence xxx (2012) 1–11 Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Journal of Adolescence journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jado Participating in a policy debate program and academic achievement among at-risk adolescents in an urban public school district: 1997–2007 Susannah Anderson a, Briana Mezuk b,* a Department of Global Community Health and Behavioral Sciences, Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, USA b Department of Epidemiology and Community Health, Virginia Commonwealth University, USA abstract Keywords: This study investigates the relationship between participating in a high school debate Adolescent program on college-readiness in the Chicago Public School district over a 10-year period. Education At-risk school students were identified using an index including 8th grade achievement, Debate poverty status, and enrollment in special education. Regression analyses were used to Graduation assess the association between debate participation and graduation and ACT performance. At-risk Overall, debaters were 3.1 times more likely to graduate from high school (95% confidence interval: 2.7–3.5) than non-debaters, and more likely to reach the college-readiness benchmarks on the English, Reading, and Science portions of the ACT. This association was similar for both low-risk and at-risk students. Debate intensity was positively related to higher scores on all sections of the ACT. Findings indicate that debate participation is associated with improved academic performance for at-risk adolescents. Ó 2012 The Foundation for Professionals in Services for Adolescents. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Introduction There are substantial disparities in educational attainment according to race, income, geography and ethnicity.
    [Show full text]
  • Judging Policy Debate
    Judging Policy Debate 4 Rules 5 Recommendations Rule #1: Judge Ethically Make a decision based upon the debate you hear o NOT their coach o NOT whether you like the debaters o NOT what happened last time this team met your team o NOT whether it might help your team Treat students with respect oDon’t misuse your authority to berate students oDon’t use profanity or abusive language Rule #2: Judge Conscientiously You have a responsibility to listen to the speeches o NOT reading the newspaper o NOT talking with a friend o NOT engaging in distracting nonverbal signals Base your decision on arguments presented o Make an effort to check personal biases o Reason for decision should select among arguments presented, not what you thought about the students’ appearance or mannerisms Rule #3: Judge Consistently Have a standard which you will apply o Stock Issues o Policymaking o Tabula Rasa Communicate your standards o Judge philosophies o Ballot Rule #4: Communicate Your Decision Fully Know the expectations as to oral comments in your league o Are oral comments allowed? o Can decisions be revealed? Fill out ballots completely o Assist the tab room o Always provide a reason for decision on the ballot Don’t Do the Debaters’ Work For Them Don’t debate the debaters Let the rebuttals decide the round What about dropped arguments? Keep Each Argument on a Separate Sheet DA: Increase Terrorism Real threat Pull A sub Agree A. US Heg Why true? prevents now Unclear Topicality: Substantially Real threat History STANDARWe Untrue Pull A sub proves disagree most of the A.
    [Show full text]
  • DA Generic Core
    ADI 2011 1 Research Lab Dev’t Assistance Generic Core DA Generic Core DA Generic Core ................................................................. 1 DA Fails – Western Model ................................................ 55 DA Fails – Politicized ....................................................... 56 ***DA Solves*** ................................................... 3 DA Fails – Poverty ............................................................ 57 DA Solves – Generic ........................................................... 4 DA Fails – Governance Turn ............................................ 58 DA Solves – A2: Rejection .................................................. 5 DA Fails – Governance Turn ............................................ 59 DA Solves – A2: Transition ................................................. 6 DA Fails – Accountability Turn ........................................ 60 DA Solves – A2: Long term ................................................ 7 DA Fails – Transition Turn ............................................... 61 DA Solves – A2: Dependency ............................................. 8 DA Fails – Transition Turn ............................................... 62 DA Solves – A2: Parties ...................................................... 9 DA Fails – Transition Turn – Impact Calc: Escalation ..... 63 DA Solves – A2: Definitional Problems ............................ 10 DA Fails – Gov’t to Gov’t ................................................. 64 DA Solves – A2: Governance ...........................................
    [Show full text]
  • POLICY DEBATE: “Two Versus Two” Debate
    WNDI 2014 p. 1 of 12 Policy Debate http://www.whitman.edu/academics/whitman-debate POLICY DEBATE: “Two versus two” Debate. CONDUCTING THE DEBATES THEMSELVES Each debate will have four constructives, four rebuttals, and four cross-examination periods. In a single debate, each student will deliver two speeches—a constructive and a rebuttal. 1AC: 5 minutes First Affirmative Constructive : This speech is almost fully prepared before the debate starts. The First Affirmative constructive speech is expected to defend the resolution in the most compelling way possible. This means at least 3 (and probably 4) components should be part of the 1ac: The existence of a problem, the consequences (impact of significance) of that problem, the need for a solution provided by the proposition, and (optional) arguments against what the negative side might say. In other words, the task of the 1A is to explain the resolution and provide arguments defending the resolution. The format is flexible, but most good 1As will defend an interpretation of the resolution and then establish 3-5 arguments in favor of the resolution. Each argument should have a claim, data, and warrants. Each argument should independently prove that the resolution is valid or true. Each argument should be given weight (significance)—why does that argument matter? Each argument should also link itself directly to the wording of the resolution. Most importantly, each argument should have evidence to back it up—quotations from experts, statistics, narratives, other reasoning, etc. CX of 1AC: 3 minutes The negative team cross-examines the affirmative speaker. These 3 minutes can be used to clarify information, set up future arguments, expose weaknesses in the speech, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Lincoln-Douglas Debate Textbook
    © National SpeechDebate & Association LINCOLN-DOUGLAS DEBATE Dr. Seth Halvorson & Cherian Koshy LINCOLN-DOUGLAS DEBATE Dr. Seth Halvorson & Cherian Koshy © NATIONAL SPEECH & DEBATE ASSOCIATION LINCOLN-DOUGLAS DEBATE Copyright © 2013 by the National Speech & Debate Association All rights reserved. Published by National Speech & Debate Association 125 Watson Street, PO Box 38, Ripon, WI 54971-0038 USA Phone: (920) 748-6206 Fax: (920) 748-9478 [email protected] No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, now known or hereafter invented, including electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, information storage and retrieval, or otherwise, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without the prior written permission of the Publisher. The National Speech & Debate Association does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, age, gender identity, gender expression, affectional or sexual orientation, or disability in any of its policies, programs, and services. Printed and bound in the United States of America Contents About the Authors . iv About This Text . v. Unit 1: Introduction to LD Debate . 01 Unit 2: How do I write a case? . 09 . Unit 3: During the debate round . 25 Unit 4: Refutation . 33 Unit 5: Rebuttal Speeches . 43. Unit 6: Go with the flow: taking notes and tracking arguments . 51 Unit 7: Delivery . 55 Unit 8: Sample Affirmative Case . 61 Unit 9: Sample Negative Case . 69 . Unit 10: The Debate Round: A Timeline . 73 . Unit 11: Practice suggestions and drills for debaters . 77 APPENDIX A: Glossary of commonly used debate terminology .
    [Show full text]
  • Policy Debate Manual
    The National Debate Project's Policy Debate Manual Dr. Joe Bellon Director of Debate, Georgia State University with Abi Smith Williams NDP 2006, version 1.2 National Debate Project © 2006 Dr. Joe Bellon for questions concerning copyright permission, electronic copies, and permission to post this publication online contact Dr. Bellon at: [email protected] Contents What Is Debate? ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 2 Speech Cheat Sheet ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 5 The Constructive Speeches ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 8 The Rebuttals ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 9 Flowing Tips ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������10 Symbols and Abbreviations ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������11 This Is What It Sounds Like In a Speech �����������������������������������������������������������������������12 This Is What It Looks Like On the Flow �������������������������������������������������������������������������13 Introduction to Speaking Style �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������14 Delivery and Staying "In Shape" for Debate ���������������������������������������������������������������17
    [Show full text]
  • Answering Disads: the Primary Function of a Disadvantage Is To
    Answering Disads: The primary function of a disadvantage is to prove that the plan causes an undesirable impact that is auxillary to what it actually does, i.e. the plan spends more than the budget can tolerate, breaking the budget causes economic decline. Think of them as anti-advantages, something the plan causes is bad. With that in mind, answering a disadvantage relies on your ability to prove that the consequences of not enacting the plan are worse than anything the plan could cause. Debaters have to weigh the risk, and magnitude of the plan’s effects to determine whether or not it is a good idea. A crucial component in this weighing is the concept of offense and defense. The distinction is critical, more rounds are lost because of a misunderstanding of the difference. Defense is like a “nuh-uh” argument, one that denies the claim being made by the opposing team. Here are a couple of defensive arguments that might be made by a team answering a spending disadvantage: the plan does not spend money, the economy is headed downwards now, the economy will not crash. Offensive arguments do not deny the claim being made, instead they flip the negative’s claims around. The two most common are impact turns and link turns. These types of arguments agree with the thesis of the position but take the opposite stance on a particular part of the argument. A couple of examples for the spending DA are: plan helps the economy recover, plan saves money, or that increased governmental spending is good.
    [Show full text]
  • Counterplans in Policy Debate
    COUNTERPLANS IN POLICY DEBATE National Federation of State Take Part. Get Set For Life.™ High School Associations An introduction to counterplans on the Education Topic by Rich Edwards, Baylor University WHAT IS A COUNTERPLAN? . A counterplan is a policy defended by the negative team which competes with the affirmative plan and is, on balance, more beneficial than the affirmative plan. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE COUNTERPLAN Specificity: The counterplan text must be explicit Nontopicality: Some theorists say the counterplan must represent the NON‐resolution Competitiveness: The counterplan must give the judge a reason to choose between the plan and counterplan. COUNTERPLAN SPECIFICITY Sample Counterplan Text: . Example 1: The fifty U.S. state governments will adopt legislation requiring the equalization of education funding between rich and poor school districts. The counterplan bans the federal government from regulating the state‐level funding of elementary and secondary schools. Example 2: The U.S. federal government will establish a guaranteed annual income for all persons living in poverty in the United States. COUNTERPLAN NONTOPICALITY Though some judges will continue to think this is important, many contemporary debate theorists say it is NOT, for the following reasons: 1. The affirmative team is asking for adoption of the PLAN not the resolution. 2. Competitiveness provides adequate protection against abuse. 3. Ground is preserved, since the affirmative team had free opportunity to choose its position first from anywhere within the resolution. COUNTERPLAN COMPETITIVENESS Mutual Exclusivity: It is logically impossible to do both the plan and counterplan. Net Benefits: The plan alone is more beneficial than the plan plus the counterplan Other (suboptimal) Possibilities: Resource competition, Philosophical differences MUTUAL EXCLUSIVITY It is logically impossible to adopt both the plan and the counterplan.
    [Show full text]
  • International Agents of Action in Policy Debate: an Introduction To
    International Agents of Action_Edwards, p. 1 International Agents of Action in Policy Debate: An Introduction to Topic Selection in 2022-23 By Rich Edwards, Professor of Communication, Baylor University A Paper Presented to the Speech Advisory Committee of the National Federation of High Schools September 15, 2019 The Topic Selection Committee of the National Federation of High Schools has made the decision to entertain only those topic proposals in 2022-23 specifying an international actor as the agent of action. This action has been taken after consulting with representatives of the National Speech and Debate Association (NSDA), the National Catholic Forensic League (NCFL) and the National Debate Coaches Association (NDCA). Examples of international actors are the United Nations, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the European Union, the International Criminal Court, the World Health Organization, the UN Food and Agriculture Organization, or any national government (or potentially even non-government) actor outside of the United States. What is the rationale for limiting agents of action in 2022-23 to international actors? Participation in interscholastic policy debate builds valuable skills in the areas of evidence collection, building argument briefs and in oral argument. But, in addition, policy debate offers an in-depth look at major political, economic and social issues facing the nation and world. By the end of a debate season, policy debaters often have an understanding of complex issues that surpasses what could be gained by two semesters of college-level work on International Agents of Action_Edwards, p. 2 equivalent subject matters. Intensive study of a single subject matter is one of the great advantages of interscholastic policy debate.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Forum Curriculum
    Atlanta Urban Debate League Public Forum Curriculum Find us online at: youtube.com/atlantadebate facebook.com/atlantadebate instagram.com/atlantadebate twitter.com/atlantadebate Public Forum Curriculum Atlanta Urban Debate League Table of Contents Contents Table of Contents .............................................................................................................................................. 2 What Is Public Forum? ...................................................................................................................................... 3 What’s New?: An Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 3 What Is Public Forum? ................................................................................................................................ 3 Who Should Debate In Public Forum? ........................................................................................................ 3 Which Is Better: Policy or Public Forum? .................................................................................................... 3 What’s Different?: Policy v. Public Forum ....................................................................................................... 4 Topic Release (Calendar) ........................................................................................................................... 5 Sample Resolution .....................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Cross–Examination in Debate
    A GUIDE TO Cross- E amination XDEBatE W.E. Schuetz and David Gardiner Co–Authors Jana M. Riggins, Editor Designed by David C. Trussell Revised Summer 2017 UNIVERSITY INTERSCHOLASTIC LEAGUE Preface This publication serves to provide contest rules, procedures and theoretical background to assist you in being successful in UIL CX Debate competition. You will, of course, want to consult debate texts for expanded information on theory. My special thanks to the co-authors of this endeavor, Bill Schuetz and David Gardiner. Both are talented educators and successful coaches who freely give the priceless gift of mentoring. They are individuals who have unselfishly shared their personal time to serve as contest officials for the UIL CX Debate State Meet, to teach workshops at Student Activities Conferences, to serve on League committees and to serve in other valuable consulting capacities. They give of their time and energy because of their love for young people and their commitment to the art of argumentation. Their support of the UIL is deeply appreciated. In addition, special appreciation is expressed to Dr. Rich Edwards of Baylor University who, for many years, has provided the section over Internet Debate Research written specific to the current debate resolution. Dr. Edwards’ contribution to high school policy debate in Texas and across the nation is unparalleled. UIl was proud to nominate him to be inducted into the Hall of Fame of the National Fed- eration of State High School Associations. As you read this manual, remember that debate is an ever-evolving discipline. Paradigms and theory continue to evolve, and though you may initially find academic debate confusing, I challenge you to persevere.
    [Show full text]