In the present time, one of the things that more if have become common in the quarrels are a species of dither to the ignorance,
tomadam uitas times as virtue and not as defect. It is common in coloquiais quarrels and the critical a written texts the affirmation of that the texts are bad because they are “pedantes”, or because they are “difficult”. What it deserves to be detached however is the fact of that many times the unprepared reader finishes for using this argument with sights to disqualify a text that, for not being in the level of its knowledge (many times low) on determined subject, finishes for not being
understood. an examination of conscience that little is carried through, in the
direction to look for is necessary in many cases to ask itself exactly if the text is truncated and if direction, or if the reader is that he does not possess the beddings of the agreement. What it is not possible many times is to beat palm for a reader who for not having understood definitive subject or content, attributes to the author the nickname of “pedante”. Fazeristo is one of the lowest games of words that can be seen in an argument, is to try to invert the order of the things, being made the ignorãncia to seem simplicity, and the wisdom to seem preciosismo or pedantismo. The wise Sociologist said well Pierre Bourdieu (paraphrasing Jesus): “You keep of the metodológicos dogs of guard)” regarding all those to you that they search to watch and to criticize unfounded a text, due to proper incompetence in the direction to understand it and to debate it. This I test nothing more is of what a brief article in which explicito the position of that we must always search half the most understandable one in the writing, however, we must always have in mind the fact of ue “the dogs” estaram “latir'' against everything what it will not be produced by proper them, or that it will not be inside of the specter many times limited of its personal gostos.