Huh? Hah!

BobVis has found a juicy piece of academic bloviation. Me being a connoisseur and manufacturer of said, I couldn't resist his tasty conclusion. First, the sociology quote he found...

All of the interesting propositions I examined were found to involve the radical distinction between seeming and being, between the subject of phenomenology and the subject of ontology. An interesting proposition was one which first articulated a phenomenological presumption about the way a particular part of the world had looked, and then denied this phenomenological presumption in the name of 'truth', that is, in the name of a more profound, more real, more ontological criterion. Put more precisely, an interesting proposition was one which attempted first to expose the ontological claim of its accreditted counterpart as merely phenomenological pretence, and then to deny this phenomenological pretence with its own claim to ontological priority. In brief, an interesting proposition was always the negation of an accepted one. [emphasis added]

This is from an article that is required reading in virtually every social science doctoral program. It's incredible to me how a simple elegant definition like "something is interesting when it is different from what is expected" blows up into a paragraph like this.

It's easy, trust me . Go visit Bob. He hates my politics, but seems like a good guy.