On Mon, 13 Jan 2003 22:50:07 +0900, Tom Bridgeland <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

>Who do you consider a reliable source? And how do you determine?

He seems to be using a "zero tolerance" method of determining reliability.

This is a common mental technique that people use to cope with the modern
world.   Since there is a huge clamor of competing ideas (low-fat, low-carb,
conservatives, liberals, Christians, NewAge, atheists, and so on), people are
desperate for any way to choose between them.

The most common technique is to "check off" any idea or proponent of an idea,
that has an error.   The fact that you can do this for ALL of them is no
disadvantage, since it allows people to do less in an already busy life - they
don't have to get out the vote, pray or meditate, stop eating anything they
want, and so forth.

Thus, it is unpopular to point out that every book ever written has an error
(starting with Revelations, which has the 12 tribes of Israel wrong), and thus
one incorrect statement doesn't mean that the overall concept is incorrect, or
that the author doesn't have something of value to say.


--
Cheers,

Ken
[log in to unmask]