I have more of a problem with those whose decision to believe in
literal biblical inerrancy leads them to conclude that any evidence
which is not superficially consistent with the King James Version is
therefore wrong, and who edit accordingly. Not that Sam is
necessarily one such, but his contentious edits to Human and other
articles do indicate a viewpoint at odds with informed scientific
opinion on this. The fact that many Americans agree is not really
persuasive, since a goodly number also apparently believe that Elvis
is still alive.
Guy (JzG)
Encyclopedias are not about persuasion, they are about cataloging
facts (like the % of people who believe in God in a given country).
I'd appreciate it if you two stopped the rhetorical games and
one-upsmanship, and focused on trying to help improve the articles in
question. For example, providing a citation to [[Socialism]] showing
that the socialist international opposes racism, and removing the
statement currently there (that socialism opposes racism) would be a
sign of rigour.
People who assume that theirs is an "informed, scientific opinion" in
contrast to others who merely cite facts need to leave their opinions
at the door. Books of reference are to have one agenda alone, the
cataloging of accurate information. Simply because that information
does not suit your POV is no reason to exclude it. Please review
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Writing_for_the_enemy
SS
On 4/15/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman(a)spamcop.net> wrote:
On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 16:10:30 -0600, you wrote:
Yes, I mean democratic socialism or social
democracy, not
totalitarian movements which adopt some socialist elements or label
themselves socialist while butchering millions. Of course they don't
label themselves totalitarian.
It's not the first time I've come across Sam's line of reasoning.
Saying that socialists were racist because the National Socialist
German Workers Party were racist is about as valid as saying that
democracies and republics are all police states because the German
Democratic Republic was a police state. It is an absurd and easily
demolished inference.
I have more of a problem with those whose decision to believe in
literal biblical inerrancy leads them to conclude that any evidence
which is not superficially consistent with the King James Version is
therefore wrong, and who edit accordingly. Not that Sam is
necessarily one such, but his contentious edits to Human and other
articles do indicate a viewpoint at odds with informed scientific
opinion on this. The fact that many Americans agree is not really
persuasive, since a goodly number also apparently believe that Elvis
is still alive.
Guy (JzG)
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l