4 ms·
My point is that there are lots of people who don't want to endure the viewpoints that you perceive as being so obviously correct that there is no need for furt
by sverige 8y ago
My point is that there are lots of people who don't want to endure the viewpoints that you perceive as being so obviously correct that there is no need for further discussion. This attitude is much closer to the Catholic Church's ancient position on astronomy than Galileo's.
For example, I have no doubt that the flat earth theory is incorrect, but it wouldn't bother me if it we're included in Wikipedia. How can anyone learn to think critically if certain ideas are forbidden? And once the idea that it's ok to forbid certain ideas takes hold, the list of forbidden ideas always expands. That is far more dangerous than allowing what seem to be obviously ridiculous ideas to be expressed.
The problem with editorial policy for a site like Wikipedia is who gets to decide what that policy is? Thus, we have the endless fights like this one. It's avoidable in theory, but "curation" is always in vogue -- so long as the curators think like us.
- jonhendry18 8y ago"For example, I have no doubt that the flat earth theory is incorrect, but it wouldn't bother me if it we're included in Wikipedia." Sure, but it belongs in its own article (where it is found) not in the middle of the articles on Earth, geography, etc.
- fourthark 8y agohttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_flat_Earth_societies https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_flat_Earth_societies