Talk:Triumphalism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Anti-triumphalism POV is very clear. Not sure how to fix it. ~~ N (t/c) 00:49, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
- Well simply slapping that ugly tag won't accomplish much. How about this: trim the exessively long criticism of the topic and also admit that triumphalism may have an upside. Manifest destiny is arguably a triumphalism notion--one which helped consolidate the greatest power in world history. Or to use a pedestrian example, you might call the New York Yankees and their fans "triumphalist"--and they also win a hell of a lot of world series. Anyhow, let's come up with editing suggestions before simply tagging this. Marskell 18:42, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
- No, this entry didn't have a negative POV; it's a entry about a negative THING. No one takes prides in her or her own 'triumphalism.' You can't link to any websites with advice about how to encourage more triumphalism in your own group. Those who truly believe in their own superiority call themselves 'superior,' not 'triumphalist.' Those who truly are or will be victorious call themselves 'triumphant,' not 'triumphalist.' When people want to talk about an attitude worthy of praise, they use terms like 'school spirit', 'pride', or 'confidence.' The term 'triumphalism' is used when you want connotations of over-confidence, hubris, or delusion.
- No, this entry didn't have a negative POV; it's a entry about a negative THING. No one takes prides in her or her own 'triumphalism.' You can't link to any websites with advice about how to encourage more triumphalism in your own group. Those who truly believe in their own superiority call themselves 'superior,' not 'triumphalist.' Those who truly are or will be victorious call themselves 'triumphant,' not 'triumphalist.' When people want to talk about an attitude worthy of praise, they use terms like 'school spirit', 'pride', or 'confidence.' The term 'triumphalism' is used when you want connotations of over-confidence, hubris, or delusion.
-
- The addition about possible benefits of triumphalism is a good one.
- I would like to point out that, if distinctions between connotation and denotation are to be made (particularly in regard to sociological jargon), these must be clearly presented and explained. While I doubt many would refute that such a difference exists in this instance, failure to address this additional duality only muddles the issue. The fact remains: much like a square relates to a rectangle, triumphalism relates to pride, at least technically. Connotation cannot change that relationship.
- I would like to point out that, if distinctions between connotation and denotation are to be made (particularly in regard to sociological jargon), these must be clearly presented and explained. While I doubt many would refute that such a difference exists in this instance, failure to address this additional duality only muddles the issue. The fact remains: much like a square relates to a rectangle, triumphalism relates to pride, at least technically. Connotation cannot change that relationship.
- The addition about possible benefits of triumphalism is a good one.
-
-
- I also feel that presenting the two prevailing, opposing perspectives on the topic is an excellent idea. However, I am concerned about the validity of statements referencing manifest destiny, the United States and world domination. Such statements, especially when they do not cite their sources, fail my personal scrutiny test. I feel they should be revised with a more objective viewpoint, likely achieved through removing what seems like (ironically) a highly triumphalist portrayal of America.
- I also feel that presenting the two prevailing, opposing perspectives on the topic is an excellent idea. However, I am concerned about the validity of statements referencing manifest destiny, the United States and world domination. Such statements, especially when they do not cite their sources, fail my personal scrutiny test. I feel they should be revised with a more objective viewpoint, likely achieved through removing what seems like (ironically) a highly triumphalist portrayal of America.
-
-
-
- I also edited the formatting of this foremost section for ease of perusal. arquin (talk) 13:03, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
-
[edit] Are social scientists among the leading users of the term?
Marskell, I took you up on your suggestion that I google 'scholar' + 'triumphalism' and I got 60,600 hits, which contained a lot of mish-mash. I got many more hits when I googled triumphalism+politics (474K), +government (417K), or +religion (298K). But if we use this test, it seems that 'children' (305K) and those associated with 'violence' (238K) use the term more than 'scholars' do.
So I tried a variation on your approach: I googled 'triumphalism'+'Ph.D.' and got 26,500 hits, which turned out to be of better quality anyway. I looked through the first 100 (this is worth only so much of my time) for articles or presentations that: 1) had 'triumphalism' in the title and 2) were written by someone with a Ph.D. I then looked at the field in which the author studied or taught.
I guess it hinges on whom one considers to be a social scientist. Historians are the most frequent academic users of the term (mostly titles including the term ‘Cold War Triumphalism’, but you can still find discussions of Assyrian and Chaldean triumphalism!). As an undergraduate history major myself, I don't consider history to be social science--it's one of the humanities. Other humanities scholars wrote about "Muslim Triumphalism and Jewish Resistance" (literature); "Saving Private Ryan and American Triumphalism" (communications); "Handel's Messiah and Christian Triumphalism" (music); "Visiting Technowonderland in Florida: techno-triumphalism, Techno-tourism, and Feminism" (women’s studies); "The Triumphalism of Capitalism" (divinity professor!).
The strongest argument that can be made for social scientists being users of the term seems to be in a field that I didn't know existed--'economic geography' or 'political geography'--in which some scholars are debating ideas around something they call 'market triumphalism.' Their titles include "Limits of Market Triumphalism in Rural China," "Latin America’s Free-market Miracle: Deconstructing Market Triumphalism in an Era of Mirages," and "Liberation Ecology: Development, Sustainability, and Environment in an Age of Market Triumphalism." I've emailed the author of the 'mirages' article to ask what they mean by 'market triumphalism.'
I stand by my assertion that the most common uses of the term are outside the realm of social science. Within academia, the term seems to be used most frequently in the humanities, but I'll go even farther after doing this mini-research and say that I don't believe academics of ANY discipline are among the leading users of the term. It has no well-developed or well-accepted scientific or objective definition, which I would think presents difficulties for its use in peer-reviewable scholarly writings. The term is most commonly used outside academia, mainly in commentary and discussions relating to politics and religion. (You'll also get a lot of google hits (176K) on the term "blog triumphalism," but then that's not a fair test.)
- No, no, I meant: http://scholar.google.com/. It's a site google offers to search directly for primary sources. Marskell 03:35, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you! I wasn't aware of that feature; I'll make good use of it. Using that search filter (or whatever it is called), I get many of the same hits that I got with '+triumphalism +Ph.D.', so historians still make up the plurality of the cites, with the religion-related discussions and the economic geographers' talk of 'market triumphalism' close behind. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.190.122.71 (talk • contribs) 13:09, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
-
- It doesn't really matter whether "Triumphalism" is a term used in the social sciences, the humanities, or the press. But there are two relevant factors that seem more important:
- Triumphalism is (to use anthropological jargon) an observer's category, not an actor's category.
- Triumphalism is generally a pejorative term, by which outside observers criticize a particular set of attitudes -- and the actions resulting from those attitudes.
- That being said, the concept is an important one and deserves an entry like this one. I'm going to try to work these concepts into the discussion somewhere. --SteveMcCluskey 13:13, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
- It doesn't really matter whether "Triumphalism" is a term used in the social sciences, the humanities, or the press. But there are two relevant factors that seem more important:
[edit] Don't merge 'supremacist' and 'triumphalism'; just cross-reference them
A 'Supremacist' accepts or advocates a deliberate, articulated belief--a political dogma or ideology. 'Triumphalism' is most frequently an unexamined assumption or attitude--more of a sociological or psychological phenomenon. The useful concept of 'observer's category' also highlights an integral difference; supremacists claim their label.
