> At 02:11 PM 10/6/03 -0400, Brian Siano wrote:
>
>> Kelley wrote:
>>
>>> Frankly, when people say that _anything_ is "socially constructed,"
>>> I suspect that people are simply using quasi-technical terms to look
>>> sophisticated.
>>>
>>> do you have an alternative phrase that would make it more acceptable
>>> to you?
>>
>>
>> Like I said: it'd help to define what it is you're _talking_ about
>> before we start assigning phrases to it.
>
>
> well, if you're interested, i'd sit down and start reading about
> idealism, then phenomenology. then read about the emergence of the
> strand of sociological thought known as "social constructionism."
>
> let's get together for lunch in 2006 and talk about it all.
I was right: "socially constructed" _is_ an empty, vacuous term, devised solely for the benefit of merely _seeming_ erudite and well-reasoned. You use the term, and hope that it makes you look smart. But when anyone calls you on your bluff, and actually asks that it be _clarified_, get all huffy and accuse the other person of being stupid.
You're a fraud and a poser. Away with you, into the dustbin of tenure.