Dear Terry,
Thanks for your post. I'm going to beg off on a reply. You've raised a lot of important issues, but this veers so far away from the thread on Wikipedia that it becomes a new thread touching on different aspects of epistemology, philosophy of science, philosophy of knowledge, and all three applied to evidence and reasoning in research. To address these issues would require more time than I can commit to a reply at present -- and a truly long post.
I understand different perspectives on evidence and reasoning in research, as well as their uses. This thread has been about the problems of Wikipedia. Wikipedia constitutes a specific, narrow case. Inferences to my views larger issues are unwarranted.
Yours,
Ken
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011 09:47:03 +0800, Terence Love <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>Thank you for your comments on my previous email about authority. It looks like I didn't explain things well and I think you may have misunderstand what I wrote. At heart, I think this may be due to an assumption there is only one perspective on the use of evidence and reasoning in research.
|