Kind of shows that the problem with attention is not purely an artifact of social media--that the lion's share of responses at academic conferences has always gone to the person who is both notably wrong or out-of-step with other experts and who refuses to give ground much despite being criticized.
Good point. It’s not just conferences. Nexon, see below, suggests JJM’s whole career has followed this model. People point to huge citation numbers as indication of his importance. But he writes to be argued with. He’s The Opponent, which inflates the numbers. Nexon suspects if you crunched the citation numbers it would overwhelmingly be people arguing he’s wrong.
But here’s a 2 hr podcast about him with Dan Nexon. It meanders, but they get at deeper issues - like what is a scholar’s responsibility in public facing work. And they’re troubled by the substance. Highly recommended for a long car ride.
Kind of shows that the problem with attention is not purely an artifact of social media--that the lion's share of responses at academic conferences has always gone to the person who is both notably wrong or out-of-step with other experts and who refuses to give ground much despite being criticized.
Good point. It’s not just conferences. Nexon, see below, suggests JJM’s whole career has followed this model. People point to huge citation numbers as indication of his importance. But he writes to be argued with. He’s The Opponent, which inflates the numbers. Nexon suspects if you crunched the citation numbers it would overwhelmingly be people arguing he’s wrong.
Yes, JJM may not be worth attention anymore.
But here’s a 2 hr podcast about him with Dan Nexon. It meanders, but they get at deeper issues - like what is a scholar’s responsibility in public facing work. And they’re troubled by the substance. Highly recommended for a long car ride.
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/whiskey-international-relations-theory/id1497916380?i=1000553276251