Hollow Arguments

[charlestudor2005]

Every one of our views are biased Chuck. --WTF

I know that. Just trying to find that unbiased authority.

[NinaBrooke]

I think there are no sources that are never biased. Every scientific or philosophical source therefor and for that reason uses "reference frames" which makes their statements valid under certain circumstances (the references) only. Anything else is hogwash and telltales. I see that often here. But - we also discuss personal opinions - so we take telltales and hogwash as opposed to scientific references. I prefer whatsoever kind of source and link rather than "I heard someone say this and i am using his/her opinion unquestioned". Only dogmatic religions are valid universal (or telltale beliefs that is). Evrything else is always biased.
Wikipedia is not used as a good source for writing scientific articles because anyone can edit it and write stuff to it, and it will not be crossread or evaluated, which usually scientific ressource does.
You can`t quote wiki in your thesis without getting ridiculed by your professor but i think for eccie its fine. We are not making science here. So i`d consider wiki a good quote for finding further information. Its a nice invention. Shall we uncritically believe it. Of course not.
I think for here it depends what we want to discuss. If an article is for discussion we should link it (and not just quote it without stating the source - this is copyright problem, i have seen it happening here too) and discuss the article. If personal opinions are for discussion we should all discuss personal opinions. The difference is how you say it. "I believe/think/have experienced" vs. "It is a fact that.." If you state your personal opinion as subjective its ok too.

And in the end we are anyway just all trying to get laid, right?? All this foreplay.....wow......

[Iaintliein]

A list of things that don't exist: Social justice, living documents, fairness, unbiased sources, open minded debate.

Better to use sources open in their bias rather than stain the argument with tinges of hypocrisy.

As a one time scientist I agree that the lovely Ms Sastri above is on the right track, but scientists are people and do design experiments and manipulate data to suit their agenda, I've seen it first hand and anyone who keeps up saw it with "Climategate" (unless you only look to the "unbiased" media which buried the story).

If you have a point of view express it, defend it, and use sources that openly agree with it, hiding behind phrases like "unbiased" and "open minded" is nonsense.

Now, I'm off to hay my unicorn. Agreeing with my esteemed colleague WTF so many times in one week has left me faint and in need of fresh air (with lots of extra CO2).

[Guest083011]

Closed as per the request of the original poster.

[Guest083011]

now closed.