2009/4/27 doc <doc.wikipedia(a)ntlworld.com>om>:
David Gerard wrote:
> 2009/4/27 doc <doc.wikipedia(a)ntlworld.com>om>:
>> Google books is fine, as is google itself.
>> Neither is a substitute for common sense.
>> I'll take the subjectivity of human common sense over the arithmetic of
>> search engines any day.
> Certainly. But when someone seems not to be
engaging it, it can be
> useful to wave the actual book (or a scan), not merely say "there's a
> book."
You are missing the point. I should not have to. If we
have reasonably
trustworthy information on something that commonsense tells us has some
level of enduring significance, then finding a book should be unnecessary.
Commonsense, where it is more than just one person's view, should be
sufficient.
I'm not saying you should have to, I quite agree. I just lack faith in
the common sense of 100% of AFD regulars ...
- d.