I hate that "Can it be a coincidence?" or "It can hardly be a coincidence that.." argument so beloved in "Cultural Studies."
If you want to argue for a correlation or a causality, just do it. Don't just assert a probable "non-coincidence."
***
Still hating earnestness too.
I hate it when someone on "Goodreads" gives five stars to every book they've ever read.
Hater!
ResponderEliminarLeslie Fiedler's "Love and Death in the American Novel" is *built* upon the phrase "it is no coincidence that," etc.
ResponderEliminarI had no idea. I associate it with a much later development.
ResponderEliminarI believe it started with the Freudians.
ResponderEliminarEither way, I agree completely with Jonathan. It's a lazy way to make an argument. In fact, it's really not even making an argument -- it's just floating a hypothesis. Hypothesis by inference.
ResponderEliminar"Hypothesis by inference" is a delightful phrase, though I wonder where else hypotheses come from.
ResponderEliminar