Sunday, December 10, 2017
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
A Commentary on the Passing Scene by Robert Paul Wolff rwolff@afroam.umass.edu
My Stuff
https://umass-my.sharepoint.com/:f:/g/personal/rwolff_umass_edu/EkxJV79tnlBDol82i7bXs7gBAUHadkylrmLgWbXv2nYq_A?e=UcbbW0
Coming Soon:
The following books by Robert Paul Wolff are available on Amazon.com as e-books: KANT'S THEORY OF MENTAL ACTIVITY, THE AUTONOMY OF REASON, UNDERSTANDING MARX, UNDERSTANDING RAWLS, THE POVERTY OF LIBERALISM, A LIFE IN THE ACADEMY, MONEYBAGS MUST BE SO LUCKY, AN INTRODUCTION TO THE USE OF FORMAL METHODS IN POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY.
Now Available: Volumes I, II, III, and IV of the Collected Published and Unpublished Papers.
Now Available: Volumes I, II, III, and IV of the Collected Published and Unpublished Papers.
NOW AVAILABLE ON YOUTUBE: LECTURES ON KANT'S CRITIQUE OF PURE REASON. To view the lectures, go to YouTube and search for "Robert Paul Wolff Kant." There they will be.
NOW AVAILABLE ON YOUTUBE: LECTURES ON THE THOUGHT OF KARL MARX. To view the lectures, go to YouTube and search for Robert Paul Wolff Marx."
Total Pageviews
Search This Blog
Philosopher's Stone
Blog Archive
-
▼
2017
(490)
-
▼
December
(38)
- CHATTELS MOVABLE AND IMMOVABLE
- HOT OFF THE PRESSES
- A REPLY TO PROFESSOR PIGDEN AND OTHERS
- ANOTHER STRAW IN THE WIND
- QVELLING
- THANK YOU, ALL
- MILESTONES, OR AT LEAST PEBBLES
- ONCE MORE UNTO THE BREACH, DEAR FRIENDS, ONCE MORE
- A QUESTION FOR CHRISTMAS EVE
- THE PASSAGE OF TIME
- SAID MUCH BETTER THAN I COULD
- MORE BULLETINS FROM THE ENGLISH/TURKISH FRONTLINES
- THE DELIGHTS OF INTERNATIONAL BINGE WATCHING
- BLECH!
- HOW TO STAY SANE
- TIME TO GET REAL
- YOU GOTTA LOVE DEMOCRACY
- THE MIRACLE OF MODERN MEDICINE
- WHAT IS TRUTH? ASKED JESTING PILATE
- A SPONTANEOUS CAVIL
- IT FEELS AS THOUGH WE ARE APPROACHING A CLIMAX
- AN INTERESTING OBSERVATION FROM AN UNLIKELY SOURCE
- A QUESTION OF TRANSLATION
- THIS COULD BE THE START OF SOMETHING BIG
- BACK TO WHAT REALLY INTERESTS ME
- DAY OFF
- PAST MY SELL BY DATE
- THE DOZENS, BRITISH STYLE
- YOU CAN'T MAKE THIS STUFF UP
- AN HYPOTHESIS
- ASTROLOGICAL INTIMATIONS
- SCHMUCK!
- HISTORIOGRAPHICAL MUSINGS
- TIGGER DOES A L;ITTLE DANCE
- PASSING THE TIME
- ANY FLOTSAM IN A SHIPWRECK
- SICK AT HEART
- RESPONSE TO SOME COMMENTS
-
▼
December
(38)
About Me
- Robert Paul Wolff
- As I observed in one of my books, in politics I am an anarchist, in religion I am an atheist, and in economics I am a Marxist. I am also, rather more importantly, a husband, a father, a grandfather, and a violist.
11 comments:
According to the revision history, someone with the username "Czar" added and removed thousands of characters to and from the Wikipedia article on Oct 2. The reason for the removals were "rmv unsourced: need reliable, secondary sources".
Oh well, better unsourced than ensorcelled.
This Czar seems overzealous. Wikipedia policy is very strict about sourcing of controversial claims concerning living people (libel concerns), but I didn't see anything particularly controversial in the article as it was before Czar's edit.
Maybe someone just doesn't want me to get above myself. :)
Professor, if you have or can obtain a copy of what existed before, why don't you source the material yourself? what better source is there? or have a credentialled follower do it? Where's Comrade Tom anyway?
All of the Oct. 2 removals by Czar can be undone by another editor.
It is my understanding that wikipedia does not generally regard people as reliable sources concerning themselves (and I am inclined to think that may be wise). But it is true that someone could restore the material Czar removed, ideally adding in links to sources where available. Maybe someone more familiar with our esteemed host than myself, who might as a result have a better idea where to find such sources?
It is my understanding that wikipedia does not generally regard people as reliable sources concerning themselves (and I am inclined to think that may be wise)
I can understand they taking that attitude, the problem is that they don't enforce it -- at least they don't do it uniformly -- and I've seen Wikipedia editors under a pen-name quoting themselves in real life as authority.
As far as I can tell, there's a lot of ideological squabbling going on in Wikipedia. This often shows up as "editions".
For what it is worth, my take on it is that, with Wikipedia, you get back what you paid for.
This "Czar" character must have an agenda. Not unlike algorithms and the mathematicians behind them (at google for one) who are filtering out independent left sources.
Readers might be interested in the blog post below. A careful reading illustrates some of the more benign antics of Wikipedia editors interested in economics and philosophy
http://econospeak.blogspot.com/2017/09/how-i-came-to-no-longer-be-kaldorian.html
The author of that post is J. Barkley Rosser and this is his website, where you can find his CV:
http://cob.jmu.edu/rosserjb/
"Oh well, better unsourced than ensorcelled"
Also, better unsourced than uncolted.
[See Harry Levin, "Falstaff Uncolted" (Modern Language Notes, 1946), reprinted in his Shakespeare and the Revolution of the Times (1976)]
A cool word, though I have no substantive memory of the piece...
Post a Comment