Debate:Do quotes used to support a theory just make an article look stupid?
From Conservapedia
During my time here, I've seen a lot of articles with entire sections filled with quotes, usually of the form: "Young Earth Creationists cite Dr. X", followed by a one line quote.
While I believe using a philosophical or expert's quote as an introduction to a subject looks very stylish, I'm amazed by the huge number of respected scientists, especially the dead ones, who chose this site to finally confess that their theories are really just bullsh*t.
Although I don't wish to mention the noble art of quote mining here, I do believe scientific articles are better filled with facts and studies rather than a bunch of one line quotes.
Putting quotes in these articles make it seem like the author has no real evidence for his claims, that's why I propose not to use quotes in scientific articles anymore.
Who (dis)agrees with me?
Quotes should never be used to explain your argument, only to colour it. Underscoreb 00:54, 24 January 2008 (EST)
- I agree with you to a point. Quotes, properly used, make something authoritative, as in, "when the Executive tries to act as Commander-in-Chief of the Homeland the Constitution demands an institutional process inquiry (see Youngstown v. Sawyer, accord Hamdi)", but proper intellectual writing is personal analysis supported by quotations, not consisting of quotations. So I'm with you.-Speaker 10:26, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
- Quotes can create the illusion that there is an expert who agrees with your point-of-view. It's a well known rhetorical device. Of course, it depends on the situation. Sterile 11:55, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
- If used responsibly, I mean. As in, not in this "article".-Speaker 12:01, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
I hate it when people use quotes from random people who aren't experts on the subject, or when they use quotes without any knowledge of the person they are quoting. But the most annoying of all is using quotes from the founding fathers. There is not a single quote from the founding fathers that cannot be countered with a quote from another founding father, or sometimes the exact same founding father, and they lived 200 years ago when America was 13 weakly united states who only stayed together to prevent some European power coming in and conquering them. Defend your argument yourself. Rellik 23:55, 16 March 2008 (EDT)
