[Wikipedia-l] Non-notability "abuse"

[Ian Tresman]

>Wow this thread has gone off topic! Oh well;
>
>In studying a philosopher, the right attitude is neither reverence nor
>contempt, but first a kind of hypothetical sympathy, until it is
>possible to know what it feels like to believe in his theories, and
>only then a revival of the critical attitude, which should resemble,
>as far as possible, the state of mind of a person abandoning opinions
>which he has hitherto held. Contempt interferes with the first part of
>this process, and reverence with the second. Two things are to be
>remembered: that a man whose opinions and theories are worth studying
>may be presumed to have had some intelligence, but that no man is
>likely to have arrived at the complete and final truth on any subject
>whatever. When an intelligent man expresses a view which seems to us
>obviously absurd, we should not attempt to prove that it is somehow
>true, but we should try to understand how it ever came to seem true.
>This exercise of historical and psychological imagination at once
>enlarges the scope of our thinking, and helps us to realize how
>foolish many of our own cherished prejudices will seem to an age which
>has a different temper of mind.

Wise words indeed. Reminds me of the difference between skepticism 
and pseudoskeptism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoskepticism

Regards,

Ian Tresman
www.plasma-universe.com