z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Why the “Hoax” Paper of Baldwin (2018) Should Be Reinstated
Author(s) -
Geoff G. Cole
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
sociological methods and research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 1552-8294
pISSN - 0049-1241
DOI - 10.1177/0049124120914951
Subject(s) - hoax , argument (complex analysis) , ideology , reflexivity , epistemology , behaviorism , sociology , subject (documents) , swift , psychoanalysis , psychology , philosophy , law , social science , computer science , medicine , political science , pathology , library science , alternative medicine , programming language , politics
In 2018, a peer-reviewed article was published under the name of Richard Baldwin in which the author presented a critique of fat exclusion and advocated “fat bodybuilding” as a sport. Some months later, it became apparent that the article was intended as a hoax written to raise awareness to, or “expose”, a certain ideology promoted by some academics. As a result, the editors retracted the article. Using the principles of methodological behaviorism, and other hoax or hoax-like articles, I will argue that the thoughts and opinions held by any author are not important to the argument they present. I will also argue that this form of reflexive ethnography is too problematic to serve as a method of enquiry. I will therefore conclude that the Baldwin article should be reinstated.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom