On The Insider: Criminal Past of Woods Mistress Revealed
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 47 of 110:
Next »
« Previous
way off
The problem I see with your arguement is that you are putting too much faith in the source, rather using your own brain to make decisions. Nobody is stopping you, but it will be a dangerous move on your part to believe the message interpreted by you, when you, for some reason, trust the source.

If you just blindly follow messages that you have interpreted from various sources of information, as you have described here, how do you ensure any coherence in your thinking?

Information does not, in any way, potray the truth. Information is a reflection of different peoples opinions, nothing more. All information is highly valuable in helping one develop his own theories, which he can use to make predictions about his environment, but any good theory spans many subjects and many sources. That is how one can ensure a quality theory. If you simply rely on one source and one subject, it is easy to be mislead, because there is no sure way of determining whether any source is reputable.

Take your examples:

"Consider the former Iraqi Defense Minister"

If he blames his sources, then what good is he? As good as his sources? This shows he can't think for himself.

"health book that advises you to stop taking your insulin"

You would ignore this approach, just because your doctor (reputable source) tells you to? Maybe there are cures for diabetes that require for you to cut back on your insulation and follow a certain regeme. It might work. If you had diabetes, you would be wise to not be so ignorant as to turn your nose up at a possible cure for your illness, just because your doctor tells you to. Again, quite relying on people to tell you what to do. Think for yourself. That's what your brain is for.

"a guy with a tin foil beanie telling you the world is going to end in a hailstorm of gerbils"

This also, could be quite valuable. It is never an advantage to ignore. I wouldn't mind getting to know such a guy, as he either has a good sense of humor, or he has a deeply unique perspective of the world. I could probably learn a lot by getting to know such a fellow.
Posted by: timeofmind   Posted on: 12/06/05 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

The only changes needed...  nucrash | 12/05/05
Tragic!  unoriginal_sin | 12/05/05
Screening in Linux vs. Wikipedia  bhartman36 | 12/05/05
"an editorial board with subject knowledge."  voice_of_all_reason | 12/05/05
Credibility  bhartman36 | 12/05/05
The power of vetted content  tic swayback | 12/05/05
Not quite...  JustAMuggle | 12/05/05
With Linux, someone is in charge.  John L. Ries | 12/05/05
Is there really a rush?  bhartman36 | 12/06/05
As usual...  voice_of_all_reason | 12/05/05
Wikipedia is interesting, but should be considered with a grain of salt  CobraA1 | 12/05/05
A grain of salt  eric.d.dobbs@... | 12/05/05
Wikipedia is a microcosm of WWW at large  yyuko@... | 12/05/05
I agree  etheran | 12/05/05
the source?  timeofmind | 12/05/05
But credibility is relative  John L. Ries | 12/05/05
give proof!  timeofmind | 12/05/05
give proof!  timeofmind | 12/05/05
No need  John L. Ries | 12/05/05
bad example  timeofmind | 12/06/05
bad example  timeofmind | 12/06/05
how much do you know?  timeofmind | 12/05/05
Not much  John L. Ries | 12/05/05
disagree  timeofmind | 12/05/05
correction  timeofmind | 12/05/05
Intellectual suicide.  Zinoron | 12/07/05
you missed it  timeofmind | 12/07/05
Can I imagine? There is no need.  Zinoron | 12/08/05
not quite  rrrr | 12/05/05
Not ready for prime time  NobodyHome | 12/05/05
Did you do anything besides read the article  nucrash | 12/05/05
Yikes!  BitTwiddler | 12/05/05
Wikipedia's inherent flaw  rrrr | 12/05/05
Would both not be good?  bghost | 12/05/05
can't be  rrrr | 12/05/05
hmm....  bghost | 12/07/05
Not enough  John L. Ries | 12/05/05
It's crap!  Tezcatlipoca | 12/05/05
I agree  timeofmind | 12/05/05
You haven't really won a debate...  John L. Ries | 12/05/05
I agree  timeofmind | 12/05/05
Anonymous Users can EDIT Wikipedia?  mwagner@... | 12/05/05
Information-gathering actually HAS changed, deal with it  Sioen | 12/05/05
The "New Information World Order"  bhartman36 | 12/05/05
Trust  timeofmind | 12/05/05
Valuable Information  bhartman36 | 12/06/05
way off  timeofmind | 12/06/05
Information vs. truth  bhartman36 | 12/06/05
You missed it. Try reading my post.  timeofmind | 12/06/05
Re: You missed it. Try reading my post.  bhartman36 | 12/06/05
Re: You missed it. Try reading my post.  bhartman36 | 12/06/05
again - points missed  timeofmind | 12/06/05
On Colors, Craziness, and Cures  bhartman36 | 12/06/05
ok, this is good  timeofmind | 12/07/05
What algorithm do you use to arrive at the "zero credibility" result?  dcstrain | 12/05/05
if(credibility == unknown) { credibility = 0; }  CobraA1 | 12/06/05
Credibility Equation  bhartman36 | 12/06/05
fine line  timeofmind | 12/06/05
The Difference between Credible and True  bhartman36 | 12/06/05
two different things  timeofmind | 12/07/05
actually, sorry  timeofmind | 12/07/05
The Difference between Credible and True  bhartman36 | 12/06/05
Credibility Equation  bhartman36 | 12/06/05
WOW  jswift | 12/05/05
It's Like a Fungus  Lisanne001 | 12/05/05
Opinion of a fact? Right!  NeverLift | 12/05/05
open source  rsars | 12/05/05
Can you ever be 100% sure about any information?  John_Doe69 | 12/05/05
This is the other end of that stick  NeverLift | 12/05/05
encyclopedias contain facts?  timeofmind | 12/05/05
facts  timeofmind | 12/05/05
It's not a problem, it's a "feature"  DanielB | 12/05/05
How Does One Edit 500,000 articles?  Lisanne001 | 12/05/05
Delegation  John L. Ries | 12/05/05
Reality is a matter of perception - Wikipedia reflects 'our' perception  benram | 12/05/05
'our' perception is psychotic  rrrr | 12/05/05
Who gets to determine what is true?  Flash00 | 12/05/05
good point!  timeofmind | 12/06/05
nobody  rrrr | 12/06/05
the source is not important  timeofmind | 12/06/05
A true testament to wikipedia's success  timeofmind | 12/05/05
Two Instances. Do you believe that they are minority circumstances?  Lisanne001 | 12/05/05
refer to the first report in the article  timeofmind | 12/05/05
I disagree  CobraA1 | 12/05/05
bad example  timeofmind | 12/05/05
Good example  CobraA1 | 12/06/05
I agree, mostly  timeofmind | 12/06/05
people  timeofmind | 12/05/05
That is like saying...  Zinoron | 12/07/05
Perhaps Not Even 10,000 Editors  Lisanne001 | 12/05/05
it's left to the public  timeofmind | 12/05/05
Perhaps Not Even 10,000 Editors  rrrr | 12/05/05
The wikipedia is a teenager  daver_z | 12/05/05
OK, I'll Buy That Analogy  Lisanne001 | 12/05/05
a suggestion  f3773t | 12/05/05
rating system  timeofmind | 12/06/05
re: rating system  f3773t | 12/06/05
authorities  timeofmind | 12/06/05
backup copies  f3773t | 12/06/05
I see  timeofmind | 12/06/05
pending wikipedia debacle  top_manager | 12/05/05
time  timeofmind | 12/06/05
rating system above  timeofmind | 12/06/05
which articles?  eric.d.dobbs@... | 12/06/05
This isnt causing skeptics  ickusslime@... | 12/07/05
Correction  ickusslime@... | 12/07/05
Considering that...  Zinoron | 12/07/05
Growing pains for Wikipedia  paradoxlie-freeswim@... | 12/07/05
your brilliant  timeofmind | 12/08/05
Wikipedia is great  Sectusempra | 02/17/06

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement

Meet Doc

  • Here to help you with your Document Management Needs
  • Doc is an enigma. Born to a Russian ballerina and a German electrical engineer, he grew up in various locations in the United States. He’s seen the insides of more brands, versions, and generations of printer and printer-related hardware than almost anyone.
  • To learn more about this mysterious figure check out his blog on ZDNet. You’ll be glad you did.
  • Produced by
    ZDNet and