學術 Blog 的邊際效應
Saturday, September 22, 2007
兩則 academic blog 上的討論,一個是政治學者的,一個是經濟學者的。Daniel Drezner 講了一個提案,APSA 很進步,想要理解 blog 與政治學的關係,Dani Rodrik 放了一個 post,徵求同行的看法。Rodrik 是詢問讀者希望那位經濟學家出來 blogging。
Drezner 的文章問了 4 個問題:1) What do you think are the do's and don'ts of poli sci blogging?
這幾個問題,還真的引來其他美國學者的回文,不過樣本實在太少,很難做概括性的描述,只是,社會學者似乎比較樂於以真面目示人,政治學者就。。。不過在直覺上,無論是政治學者或是社會學者,英美學者對於 blogging 採取的態度,有一定的接受性。但是,這並不代表對於 blog 的敵視態度應該被忽視。避免被同仁、大頭覺得此君太閒,恐怕是沒拿到 tenure 的 blogger 共同的痛 :P 我慣常閱讀的英美學者 blog,社會科學家為作者的頗多,華人世界的比例中,台灣的比例甚至比中國與香港兩地還低,這是一個足堪玩味的現象。
2) Does your blog help your scholarly pursuits? If so, how?
3) Are your colleagues aware of your blog? If so, what is their reaction? Has it changed over time?
4) As a political scientist, which blogs, if any, are must-reads for you (something like IR Rumor Mill or Fantasy IR doesn't count).
比較令人好奇的是,blogging 對於學術創作有沒有幫助? Nexon 用一個非常正面的態度來回答:I'd say that my blogging has led directly to one publication (a reprint of a blog post) and indirectly to a couple of works. Some of my present projects originated in blog series; or, at least, blogging on the topics gave me a chance to put some thoughts down on virtual paper.
Well, I gotta learn something from him.
The biggest advantage of blogging is no different for academics than for others: social networking.
As someone who tends towards IR theory and conceptual work, however, I've found blogging and invaluable tool for keeping up with current events and integrating theory and practice in my own thinking and teaching more than I used to.
One of the interesting (and depressing) processes associated with blogging and IR was the sudden emergence and abandonment of the the "snide blogs" on academic departments. I'm glad most of these have died, but they provided a window into some very unpleasant aspects of the discipline. One blog that I thought showed some promise but also seems to be moribund is the The Political Science Journal Monitor. I thought that might have been an opportunity for some very overdue discussion of the state of publishing and peer-review in our field. Sadly, not so much in the end.
Dani Rodrik 讓我想到另一位優秀的土耳其裔經濟學者 Daron Acemoglu,而他也在 The blogger of the future 榜上名列 Stigliz 之後,著名的 Sen 之前(已經有寫作的 Krugman 當然不在這個討論中)。他發了兩封信給排名前列的 Stigliz 與 Acemoglu(Rodrik 非常酷的以土耳其文寫給同胞,希望有天我也能用 POJ 寫台語 :)),邀請他們下來寫,得到這樣的回應:UPDATE: Daron Acemoglu responds by saying blogging "seems like a lot of work." He adds "I am already overcommitted, so it's a bit scary to take something else on." But he promises to send a "guest blog" at some point.
這提醒我,台灣好像經濟學家似乎也蠻少 blog 的,搞不好諸位經濟學者經過 B/C Analysis 之後,發現除了像李紀珠以外,blogging 的效益太低。
UPDATE2: Anya Stiglitz writes back to say that she and Joe have been on the road in Ethiopia and without regular e-mail access. Apparently, Stiglitz has been doing a bit of blogging on the NYTimes website to cover for Nick Kristoff.
不知網友希望台灣的那些社會科學家來 blogging?或許,連郭台銘也來 blog 了,紐約時報也大舉開放他的 archive,似乎可以更鼓勵台灣學界的分享風氣?





Post a Comment