If you give the sources, anyone who disagrees simply says that the authors were prejudice. If you do not, anyone who disagrees discounts the information as "made up". Even if you give sources directly from the criminal justice system, it is ignored as being skewed for political reasons. Why bother?
2007-08-14 04:51:05 · 16 answers · asked by Enigma®Ragnarökin' 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Lab Grrl: Generally speaking, the critical thinkers have done their own research, and have little use for the source. It is those who do not research that need sources, and those are also the ones who discount any source you give. If your sources are only going to be used by people who already have the information, or who will do their own research anyway, whats the point?
2007-08-14 05:01:23 · update #1
Every once in a while a person legitimately asks a question and really wants to learn so I think the sources are useful at that time.
2007-08-14 04:54:46 · answer #1 · answered by The Bog Nug 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Sources are just your way of saying you have legitimate knowledge of the situation you just typed about and this means that it is LIKELY more credible. The main reason for listing website sources is so that people can check your answer if they don't believe you, and maybe learn a little themselves what you're talking about. That's one of the main reasons. But it's generally used to indicate legitimate knowledge.
2007-08-14 11:57:04 · answer #2 · answered by Brian H 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Actually no, a source can be objectively verified and compared to others. Often when sources are requested or needed, it's because the statement(s) or statistic(s) seem to be questionable and thus need to have their source evaluated. If someone discounts a creditable source, especially one that has been independently verified, then that's their problem.
2007-08-14 12:01:26 · answer #3 · answered by Pirate AM™ 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Just because someone chooses to discredit sources for invalid reasons does not mean your sources are invalid. If someone refuses to acknowledge the truth behind your argument no matter what you say, it is their fault not yours. At least you know you provided them with enough reason to draw the right conclusions. However they interpret this information is entirely up to them.
2007-08-14 11:55:04 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
That may be true, but at least it shows you have support for statements that otherwise you could be accused of making up. Sources are always questioned, but they do lend some validity to your point. Without them, it's just your words.
2007-08-14 11:57:18 · answer #5 · answered by Scott B 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sources aren't your own thoughts. Everyone has their own interpretation of the Bible, Quran etc. I never give sources because my sources are the thoughts that comes out of my head, my own interpretation of life and my perception of Reality.
2007-08-14 11:55:37 · answer #6 · answered by Screwdriver 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Agreed. But, source references are sometimes used by those who are not here to flame your questions/sources.
2007-08-14 11:54:21 · answer #7 · answered by credo quia est absurdum 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't bother. For my opinions, it can be assumed that I am always the source.
2007-08-14 11:55:10 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because those of us who think critically can evaluate your claims based on the source, not just you.
Edit: Read dbytz's answer.
2007-08-14 11:54:06 · answer #9 · answered by LabGrrl 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Makes sense in the other sections I suppose where answers are less opinion and more fact.
2007-08-14 11:53:58 · answer #10 · answered by Menon R 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋