Hi Cornel, Happy New Year to you and all the Goanetters.
In some of your posts you make a point about reading (other people's writings and reasoning) taking more importance that using common sense (one's own reasoning). To a point you are correct in that, reading other perspectives helps critically analyze and refine one's own thought process. This further got me contemplating some more fundamental issues you raise in what you write. This applies quite a bit to what I see on Goanet. Not to belabor the issues, here are four short questions: 1. Does one always read what is written? (corollary: one sees and reads what the mind knows). 2. Does one understand what one reads? (This includes comprehension and analysis of the written material. To a great extent, this depends on the background, knowledge and analytical skill of the reader. These issues may especially apply in the net-surf era where one can just provides web-links as references). 3. What makes an author an authority on what they write? (With today's ease to publish, TV appearance, and web blogs every one is / can be a writer but not an authority). 4. Does an author have an agenda / perspective? Do the readers know that background and environment? I would like feedback / thoughts from you and other prolific writers who have done a lot of research for their writings. Thanks in anticipation. Kind Regards, GL
