On 13/04/2008, Ian Woollard <ian.woollard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 13/04/2008, Jonas Rand <joeyyuan(a)cox.net>
wrote:
> Wikipedia has a big flaw: neutrality. The core
principle of writing from a
> "neutral" point of view is contradictory: it has a point of view in
itself,
> and the point of view is supposedly against points of view. In the wacky
> world of hypocrites and liars, there is such a thing as a point of view
> without viewpoints. In reality, however, facts are limited and mostly things
> are opinions, philosophies, viewpoints, or lies.
But that's not the goal of neutrality! The goal of
neutrality is to
*collect* all signficant points of views and represent them in the
wikipedia!
Indeed. Think of "neutral point of view" as "what the subject looks
like from 20,000 feet up." We're all on the ground, with our various
points of view, and trying to work out amongst ourselves what the
subject does in fact look like from 20,000 feet up. This is of course
difficult. And it's more of a compass to work towards than an
achievable goal.
- d.