[WikiEN-l] While we're at it, NOR line-by-line

[Ron Ritzman]

On 4/7/08, WJhonson at aol.com <WJhonson at aol.com> wrote:
>
>  In a message dated 4/7/2008 5:27:04 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
>
> ritzman at gmail.com writes:
>
>  Would  the phrase "all research is original" be a simple way of stating
>  the  above?>>

>  No.  When I go to the library and read the newspaper I
> am not doing  original
> research.  I am doing source-based research.  They are
> not  the same thing.
>
>  Original research means I am *creating* the statements
>  of fact, not that  I'm
>  looking them up in another source.
>
>  So "all research" is not "original" since people use
>  the word "research" to
>  cover looking things up in other sources.

I wasn't trying to argue that it was. I was asking if the phrase "all
research is original" summed up the following paragraph in the
original post.

"Indeed, the opposite is increasingly widely accepted. One of the major
composition texts these days is called _Everything's an Argument_, and
makes the case, essentially, that one cannot organize information
without advancing an argument. Research is always an interpretive and
synthetic process, and any presentation of research advances a
position."