<p>Well GrammerNazi, I am sure that a concentration camp survivor might better be able to discuss this topic with you. Naivete duly noted.</p>
<p>An influx of trolls wasn’t how I imagined this thread to go, but what can I do? I think most rational people, concentration camp survivors or not, are not daft to the extent that they think a term like “grammar nazi” is offensive. Terms of that nature aren’t meant to recall atrocities of WWII, nor they do even do that to begin with. A naive individual is one who dwells on the past and uses it as an excuse to make a trivial tirade in the present. The term itself means one who is anal about grammar, and its a term that has become the norm In our culture. The misspelling is just additional tongue-in-cheek humor on my part. Such behavior is akin to being offended by the term “soup nazi” while watching Seinfeld, and it’s quite obvious that “soup nazi” isn’t universally considered to be an offensive and “brazen” term. That, my friend, is na</p>
<p>@MutaRiSC</p>
<p>I wouldn’t say that TASP avoids politics…it can actually get very, very intense (i.e. hours long debates, hurt feelings, etc.). Depends on who’s there, though.</p>
<p>@watchmesoar</p>
<p><em>snap snap</em></p>
<p>I think it’s important to distinguish between the seminar topics and the general culture of TASP. While seminars may only casually reference politics and remain firmly rooted in the theoretical/philosophical, discussions in and around the house were frequently political. </p>
<p>@GrammerNazi, I would caution against casting political topics as “trite” and philosophical topics as meaningful. The political can be philosophical, and vice-versa, and a solid understanding of one will definitely deepen any discussions of the other.</p>
<p>Oh, I meant that differently. I wasn’t making a blanket statement for politics in general, but trite topics in political banter itself. Like you said, philosophy and politics delve into each other. Dismissing of politics altogether wouldn’t do much for the advancement of a philosophical discussion, seeing that they feed off of each other.</p>
<p>@bbccpp Okay, Mr. ■■■■■, you’ve had your fun. Now, cut the immaturity. </p>
<p>GrammerNazi, what are you thinking of critically analyzing?</p>
<p>oh my ****ing god the seminar listing just came out and you guys are so lucky</p>
<p>ItsAThing: I haven’t decided yet. You?</p>
<p>eeeeeeeee: ermahgerd - thanks for updating us!</p>
<p>The choices for a moniker are infinite. I see no reason to choose one which might in any possible way be considered offensive in any possible manner. This is a friendly, informative information exchange. There is no reason to offend. I am not trying to impune anyone’s integrity, just stating my opinion…</p>
<p>best tasp CC thread yet congrats guys</p>
<p>It has kept me entertained to an extent, that’s for sure.</p>
<p>bbccpp, which seminar are you interested in? Maybe you should try Literature takes On Moral Complexity. You seem to be into making moral judgements about people you’ve never met.</p>
<p>Just looked at the prompts. Can’t say I’m too happy. </p>
<p>The first three are okay. Literature takes on Moral Complexity might be interesting and food might lend new insight.</p>
<p>I’m afraid the last, Dark Phrases of Womanhood: Black Feminist Approaches to History and Literature, doesn’t really interest me. I don’t have anything against black people nor do I dislike feminism; its just that it has no bearing upon my life.</p>
<p>What do you all think?</p>
<p>e^10</p>
<p>you’re the most hilarious. thanks for stickin’ round - i have no idea why i’m here when i have things to be doing. all of you on this thread that have no idea what’s going on (the majority, but s’okay), you’ll be really pleased at how much time you’ve wasted being on here instead of being the sort of human that would benefit from a summer spent thinking. but still, i can’t blame ya. stay awake.</p>
<p>re mutarisc: well i’ll say that, with the obvious exception of the lit one, the choices are way more eclectic/weird than last year’s and i like that. i mean, “FOOD”? come on.</p>
<p>it’s okay not to be interested in a topic–i basically flat-out refused to attend the “democracy and diversity” one last year in my app–but the “it has no bearing upon my life” justification seems a little…off…to me. i mean, if it has “no bearing upon your life” insofar as you are not a) a woman or b) black, well…it doesn’t have to, in that sense! i don’t think you necessarily have to be directly affected by the implications (although insert spiel about how “EVERYONE IS AFFECTED BY THIS TOPIC WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO IT”) of an academic topic to be interesting in learning more about it!</p>
<p>like i don’t think, e.g., the politics of evolution (which was one of the umich seminars last year) affects me directly because i go to a private school where legislation on teaching that stuff isn’t really an issue (is that still an issue anywhere?! i would probably know this and much more had i done this seminar! [this post has hella parentheses]) and i’m not interested in studying evolutionary biology in college or anything but! i think it still could have provided a wonderful experience perhaps because it’s something i am predisposed to know so little about. or something. (i went to the other umich one, btw)</p>
<p>basically i don’t think a topic has to have a huge, tangible effect on your life for it to be an interesting area of study or for you to want to learn more about it–although it’s acceptable not to really be interested in it. just something to consider.</p>
<p>also consider the ****ing awesomely heated arguments that will inevitably stem from that seminar. hell yes.</p>
<p>edit: this was an unexpectedly long response. oh well. enjoy!</p>
<p>I ****ing love food, so that’s kinda my first choice now.</p>
<p>After some consideration, I’ve tentatively decided to apply. <em>loud applause</em></p>
<p>And I’m kind of with Muta. The last topic doesn’t seem too interesting to me. But maybe I’ll warm up to it.</p>
<p>Also, I’m extremely envious of last year’s TASPers who got the “Politics of Evolution” seminar. I’d die for that topic.</p>
<p>You don’t have to be interested in all four of the seminars - when I applied, I said I absolutely wasn’t interested in attending one and it was perfectly fine. Be honest, because if you happen to get placed in a seminar that you have no desire to do, it will not be much fun.</p>
<p>i hope i didn’t come off wrong in that post. for clarity: not being interested in that fourth seminar doesn’t make you an ignorant bigot or anything. watchmesoar makes a good point in saying that you not only have the right to not be interested in a topic but should definitely definitely say if you aren’t. but–and i may be wrong on this–i feel like if you write that you’re not interested in it because “it doesn’t relate to your life” or something similar, that might sound some alarms for your application-reader-person. or not. maybe.</p>
<p>A rather interesting discussion xD I’m pretty excited for this and though getting in is a long shot, I’m still going to hope. ^.^ I’m thinking the FOOD seminar, since it very much relates to my life! And I’m not really considering the fourth one either…I feel kind of bad, but yeah.</p>