[WikiEN-l] Fwd: [Foundation-l] Board statement regarding biographies of l...

[WJhonson at aol.com]

In a message dated 4/23/2009 1:53:42 AM Pacific Daylight Time,  
dgerard at gmail.com writes:

I think  they do have meaning on an objective factual level. e.g. If
the NYT gets a  birthdate wrong and this error is perpetuated, that
doesn't make it right  however well cited it is.

But that's a detail, not the point. Is there  a formulation of what I
said (the necessity of immediatism, the lack of the  luxury of
eventualism) that you'd agree  with?>>


----------------------------------
Six-Syllable Words!
 
About birthdates that's an interesting tricky problem isn't it?  I'm  
reading the autobiography of Katherine Hepburn and she rather pointedly says  
"I'm xxx years old no matter what I've ever said before."
 
She is admitting that she has given interviews in which she fudged her own  
birthdate.  A perfect example of "right" and "wrong" having no meaning from 
 our point of view.  She knew the date, she just never told anyone and we  
can cite several articles where she should have been born in year XXX and 
much  later we find out, she was actually born in year YYY.
 
The question really should be "Is there any evidence for this?"  Not  "is 
this right?"
 
 
**************Big savings on Dell XPS Laptops and Desktops! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1219799634x1201361008/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Fad.doubl
eclick.net%2Fclk%3B214133440%3B36002254%3Bj)