[Wikipedia-l] pitching an idea

[Steve Lefevre]

David Gerard wrote:

>Wouter Steenbeek (musiqolog at hotmail.com) [050418 03:20]:
>
>  
>
>>Steve's proposal is interesting and can be defended from a philosophical 
>>point of view. Indeed most philosophers involved with science agree that 
>>objectivity is an illusion, and the quasi-objectivity we reach in e.g. 
>>encyclopaedias is only a broad consensus within one culture.
>>    
>>
>
>
>Except the ones who are actually scientists. "Sorry, evolution has been
>voted out of science."
>  
>
Here we go again. What is the criteria for who is a scientist?

>
>  
>
>>On some 
>>topics, everyone agrees, on other ones, people hold divergent views. That 
>>justifies splitting a controversial topic.
>>    
>>
>
>
>Well, only splitting as sections in an article.
>  
>

Then we have the biases inherent in serial presentation. Which side gets 
to speak first? Which side gets the last word? Does any side get to 
respond to another side's argument?

>  
>