3 ms·
An example of plagiarism on Wikipedia. Even though it's well cited, the wiki authors are paraphrasing to pass off the original article's content as their own.
by aimor 4y ago
An example of plagiarism on Wikipedia. Even though it's well cited, the wiki authors are paraphrasing to pass off the original article's content as their own.
Wikipedia: "It was described by Michael Shermer as Asimov's axiom.[1] The mistake was discussed in Isaac Asimov's book of essays The Relativity of Wrong[2] as well as in a 1989 article[3] of the same name in the Fall 1989 issue of the Skeptical Inquirer:
When people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical, they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together.
Asimov explained that science is both progressive and cumulative. Even though scientific theories are later proven wrong, the degree of their wrongness attenuates with time as they are modified in response to the mistakes of the past.[1] For example, data collected from satellite measurements show, to a high level of precision, how the Earth's shape differs from a perfect sphere or even an oblate spheroid or a geoid.[1]"
The cited article: "Not even wrong. What could be worse? Being wronger than wrong, or what I call Asimov's axiom, well stated in his book The Relativity of Wrong (Doubleday, 1988): "When people thought the earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the earth was spherical, they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Asimov's axiom holds that science is cumulative and progressive, building on the mistakes of the past, and that even though scientists are often wrong, their wrongness attenuates with continued data collection and theory building. Satellite measurements, for instance, have shown precisely how the earth's shape differs from a perfect sphere."
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/wronger-than-wrong/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/wronger-than-wron...
- Agraillo 4y agoThanks for the article, the ending is interesting because it mixed "Not Even Wrong" and Wronger than Wrong" (still wrapping my head around it): "But if you believe that thinking science is unbiased is just as wrong as thinking that science is socially constructed, then your view is not even wronger than wrong."