• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Merged Arday life and death

I can understand why the academic right are in paroxysms of rage. Autoethnography in Sociology, I mean, who wants to read about the cleaning lady's struggle as a masters graduate in Economics in the Philippines to picking up your kid's dirty laundry in Ziggurat's home State, or the Mexican gardener's struggle as the son of an undocumented immigrant in the USA. But I'll tell you what, I bet their theses would be a more fascinating read than research into the molecules that make up the pimples on a badger's bum.
 

The first one is simply a populist book available on Amazon, likely geared towards 'neurodivergent' young adults. It's a popular topic ATM. The other is not available for viewing or it's behind a paywall or limited access.
 
Ah, right. It is also on Amazon, so no need to pay for it, kids!
I searched Amazon for the title, and it said, "No results for your search query."

Please provide a link to this "populist book available on Amazon, likely geared towards 'neurodivergent' young adults."
 
What made you think that an academic text published by Princeton University Press was "likely geared towards 'neurodivergent' young adults"? Did you even read the description?
Hey, what kid does want a $113 hardcover? Yeah, the paperback is cheaper, but still: that’s not aimed at young adults.
 
Because his other book is about popular songs and how they make you feel.
Do you consider that to be an inappropriate subject for academic study?

In any case, isn't it rather stupid to assess a book on the basis of the subject matter of another? Especially when a description of the book is available to you?

The other book, by the way, is also published by an academic publisher, in this case Routledge, and shows no sign of being "geared towards 'neurodivergent' young adults". As a bonus, its description says that it utilises auto-ethnography, which is precisely the point you tried to evade by dismissing the sources Ziggurat cited as "geared towards 'neurodivergent' young adults" and "behind a paywall". Well done!
 
Last edited:
It doesn’t actually matter what the book is like or who its intended audience is. The book is not the article. They do not even have the same full title.
 
Oh, he was protected (by the Lancet for instance, and by KI here, among others) to begin with, despite some people voicing their doubts, and lauded, very much so, for his experimental techniques, and successes. And a closer look at his claimed results, and former positions, would have exposed him. Once he began killing off patients, his past was looked into, but until then, he was taken at face value.

After he messed up here, he fled to Russia, but even they eventually kicked him out.

He knew that he was a fraud, he knew that he hadn't held the positions he claimed to have held, he knew his research was fraudulent,. His narcissism or grandiosity, or whatever it was, made him continue operating, killing seven of his patients here. The arrogance of this man is monumental, and his career disastrous. He is extremely manipulative, and has lied about being the personal surgeon of a number of famous people (Clintons, Obama, the pope, and so on), and has had a very messy personal life, cheating on his wife and girlfriends, and claiming the Pope was going to host his second wedding, after the divorce hus wife had no idea they were getting.

In every single way Macchiarini is a worse fraud and liar than Arday (whom I am not making excuses for), abd his career was an international one, and yet his story was not discussed clise to as widely as Arday's.


As you may already know, much the same way I already knew about Macchiarini in Sweden, Denmark had the case of Milena Penkowa (Wikipedia – there is much more in the Danish version of Wiki) fifteen years ago. She didn't manage to make as much damage as Macchiarini since she only dissected brains of rats or cadavers.

However, before her downfall she did manage to become the poster girl for libertarian reforms of education in Denmark by stressing how important competitiveness and a take-no-hostages attitude allegedly is in academia and by ensnaring Helge Sander, minister of research, and Ralf Hemmingsen, head of the University of Copenhagen.
Her attitude alone also resulted in her getting several awards before her fraudulent research was exposed.

Since Penkowa is white, it was also one of those cases that wouldn't appeal to the usual suspects in this thread – much the same way the case of Cofnas doesn't appeal to the majority of people whose main interest in the Arday case is as an alleged example of a DEI hire.
 
The first one is simply a populist book available on Amazon, likely geared towards 'neurodivergent' young adults. It's a popular topic ATM. The other is not available for viewing or it's behind a paywall or limited access.
it is? According to the link it was published in the Sociological Review, Vol 71 Issue 6; here's a link to it on the Sage Journals website: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00380261231184357
Ah, right. It is also on Amazon, so no need to pay for it, kids!
Hardcover US $113.54, paperback $14.86, Kindle $14.11.

I searched Amazon for the title, and it said, "No results for your search query."

Please provide a link to this "populist book available on Amazon, likely geared towards 'neurodivergent' young adults."
What made you think that an academic text published by Princeton University Press was "likely geared towards 'neurodivergent' young adults"? Did you even read the description?

Indeed, what made you think that an academic journal article was "likely geared towards 'neurodivergent' young adults"?
Amazon's description of that book makes it sound like a book Noam Chomsky might have written. Hardly a "a populist book" "geared towards 'neurodivergent' young adults."

Because his other book is about popular songs and how they make you feel.
In any case, isn't it rather stupid to assess a book on the basis of the subject matter of another? Especially when a description of the book is available to you?
Yes, that was rather stupid.
 
Hardcover US $113.54, paperback $14.86, Kindle $14.11.




Amazon's description of that book makes it sound like a book
Noam Chomsky might have written. Hardly a "a populist book" "geared towards 'neurodivergent' young adults."



Yes, that was rather stupid.
Wow, so the dreaded autoethnography is highly academical after all!
 
Wow, so the dreaded autoethnography is highly academical after all!
The problem with autoethnography is not that it isn't "academic". And again, the book is not the article, they have different titles. I didn't link to a description of the book.
 
Last edited:
The problem with autoethnography is not that it isn't "academic". And again, the book is not the article, they have different titles. I didn't link to a description of the book.
Are you able to articulate why you disapprove of autoethnography, with close reference to other academic disciplines such as Social Sciences and Humanities, and why it is acceptable in say, the branch of Women's Studies' and/or Post-Colonial Literature but in your opinion, not in Sociology at Cambridge University? I want to understand why you think it is a problem, when all such theses are properly constructed, designed and supervised, just like anyone else's.
 
Last edited:
Are you able to articulate why you disapprove of autoethnography, with close reference to other academic disciplines such as Social Sciences and Humanities, and why it is acceptable in say, the branch of Women's Studies' and/or Post-Colonial Literature but in your opinion, not in Sociology at Cambridge University? I want to understand why you think it is a problem, when all such theses are properly constructed, designed and supervised, just like anyone else's.
Um... what? The autoethnographies are not part of his thesis. Do you even know what an autoethnography is? And I don't find them valid in any academic discipline except perhaps creative writing.
 
Um... what? The autoethnographies are not part of his thesis. Do you even know what an autoethnography is? And I don't find them valid in any academic discipline except perhaps creative writing.
It was some of Arday's students' theses. Are you able to specifically articulate - with reference to other Humanities and Social Sciences - why you disapprove of autoethnographies? Please try to avoid facile terms such as 'I don't find them valid in any academic discipline' or perhaps explain why your opinion trumps that of Cambridge University's. I am trying to understand your reasoning. Hopefully, it doesn't run along the same lines as those here who believe Sociology is, 'wokerati' rubbish and, 'an easy subject, not hard like what Chemistry is'.
 
Last edited:

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom