Karl Wick wrote:
If it is all built in modules then we can choose to
link to any or
all of the ones that are there.
Well, I think that's really a dangerous way to proceed. Whenever NPOV
is abandoned as an organizing principle, there's a temptation to think
"Yeah, this is biased, but anyone who doesn't like it can just remove
this module or not read it."
Whatever needs to be said, can be said in an NPOV way.
I think that applies to the issue raised earlier about
what things
should be included like moral arguments or other perspectives on the
subjects covered.
But there's no reason why moral arguments or other perspectives need
to be presented in any other way than NPOV.
One of the cool things about a hypertext book is
that we can link to all kinds of things that a traditional
textbook doesn't have space to print and the reader can
choose which parts he wants to read.
Sure, that's true, but we can't let it become an excuse for biased
writing.
It's probably instructive to review a philosophy text on ethics. In
well written texts, ethical arguments are presented in a neutral
fashion. The author need not advocate any of the arguments directly,
but the author must present the various viewpoints fairly.
--Jimbo