Newsgroups: alt.usage.english,sci.lang
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!spool.mu.edu!torn!watserv2.uwaterloo.ca!undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca!not-for-mail
From: tesielin@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca (Todd Sieling)
Subject: Re: anti-linguist
Message-ID: <3l3sth$4hh@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca>
Lines: 24
Sender: news@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca (news spool owner)
Nntp-Posting-Host: calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca
Organization: University of Waterloo Computer Science Club
References: <3kjsbc$9dp@riscsm.scripps.edu> <95082.024802CXM29@psuvm.psu.edu> <3kud7k$35c@ipg>
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 1995 14:15:13 GMT

In article <3kud7k$35c@ipg>,
Rupert Ward (RJ Ward, Anatomy, UMDS (Guy's Hospital), LONDON) <Rupert.Ward@ipg.UMDS.ac.uk> wrote:
>Cameron <CXM29@psuvm.psu.edu> wrote:
> 
>What is wrong with trying to stop people from doing something
>worthless? This seems like an admirable goal, to help people to
>realise that they are wasting their time. Also if one believed,
>for example, that Scientology/Phrenology does/did harm in the 
>world, then to set oneself up as an anti-whatever would be a 
>selfless and laudable act. 
>
My problem with that is that the judgement of "worthless" is left up to
somebody else.  How is X's criteria for judging the worth of an enterprise
somehow guarenteed to be right?  The history of science is laden with 
instances where a person has an apparently crackpot/worthless/impractical
idea or invention, and that idea is taken up by someone else and developed
into a significant, and usually totally different, advancement.  The muddled
point here is that you never know which way research might take you or 
where it will inadvertently point someone else, so if someone likes what
they're working on, it's one thing to voice your opinion on it, but 
ultimately you should _back off_.
TES


