[SharedKnowing] Episteme issue about Wikipedia appears
skn at inbox.org
Tue Feb 17 10:40:23 CST 2009
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 6:17 AM, David Stodolsky <
david.stodolsky at socialinformatics.org> wrote:
> On 16 Feb 2009, at 19:30, Larry Sanger wrote:
> > I stand by my claim that this is a remarkably neutral article. If I
> > had to
> > guess, the main reason that "geni" thinks the article is not neutral
> > is that
> > it does not excoriate homeopathy.
> It is also remarkably useless for anyone, but an academic interested
> in the subject. You need to have an advanced degree to deduce that
> homeopathy is quackery.
You do? I got to the line saying "In homeopathic theory, every person has a
"vital force" <http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Vital_force>, with the power
to promote healing and/or maintain good health" and had a pretty good
inkling of it, which following the "vital force" link confirmed. That was
also about the point where the usefulness of the article to me stopped,
though I can see how the "historical origins" section could be useful to
someone studying history.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the SharedKnowing