To begin with, I would love to change the title of the thread, since the dialog
is no where connected to title. But the moderators refused that change. That is
understandable and I accept their decision.
A physician supposedly cannot talk about sociology or history. But the person
with that view, can authoritatively opine on these two topics, ani thea bhair,
religion, anthropology, genetics, cancer, migration patterns, etc none of which
are related to his professed field. Granted his instantaneous expertise is
obtained by net-surfing. The rest of us mortals have to read and read; and ask
opinions, and as you say "Those who write seriously know how much they have to
study."
Unfortunately some goanetters spend more time zapping other posts (in less than
3 minutes) than reading and understanding the post they are responding to or
what is copied from the net. You put it well, "Readers will not be able to
read critically unless they are also trained or personally tuned to these
sciences." Tuning into the sciences (or anything else) does not start with
merely reading a topic on goanet.
Regards, GL
--------------- Fr. Ivo da C. Souza
In the beginning most scientists were religious priests. There are priests who
are not specialized in history, yet they are writing and publishing books on
history. If a physician has deepened sociology or history, he can surely write
on these topics. There are physicians who taught sciences, not only medicine
and biology, but physics, chemistry and mathematics. Those who write seriously
know how much they have to study. Readers will not be able to read critically
unless they are also trained or personally tuned to these sciences.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Special deal for Yahoo! users & friends - No Cost. Get a month of Blockbuster
Total Access now
http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text3.com
