This section of Bizzell's book focuses on her defining Foundationalsim and Anti-foundationalism, what it means to practice both, and what the writing community has come to due to these ideas. Her first big idea is that in the nuance of trying to fight against foundationalism and establish a freer way of thinking, anti-foundationalism has become in its own sense, a foundationalism. In this way, she describes that anti-foundationalism has taken on the idea that ones mind is able to transcend normal thought and to think critically in historical contexts. However, the very definition of anti-foundationalism that Bizzell gives states that one could never transcend and no absolute could never be found (Bizzell, 204). Bizzell then goes on to discuss idea's such as the “theory hope” of anti-foundationalism, which is the idea that mental powers will be possessed by one in the same way knowing absolute standards would in foundationalism, which is pretty much like the idea behind foundationalism, hence the pitfall of anti-foundationalism (Bizzell, 205).
Bizzell later goes on in depth talking even more about academic discourse and writing-across-the-curriculum (Bizzell, 209). In this section, Bizzell offers the idea that professors should merely teach the discourse, but try and offer their student an in-depth study of the discourse. Bizzell finally concludes her diatribe by declaring that the reason for all of this mess is the enduring feature of American anti-Intellectualsim. She states that the American Academic is not only relcutant to emerge from their own disipline, but refusing to 'help out' or engage their University on a larger scale, as a whole, is seen as something less than an academic (Bizzell, 220).
Posted by David N. on December 7, 2008
Tags Uncategorized
Comments on specific paragraphs:
Click the
icon to the right of a paragraph
Comments on the page as a whole:
Click the
icon to the right of the page title (works the same as paragraphs)