Thursday, April 26, 2007

Fact or Fiction?

Why have we become, as a society, so interested in the facts? Everything's gotta be factual. NO room for half truths. Give me a break.

I was discussing Wikipedia with some friends recently. They had nothing but bad things to say about it.

"No, no, never use it!" they urged. Demanded even. With veins popping out of their foreheads. "You never know what sort of lies or inaccuracies could be intertwined with already fabricated or exhaggerated details."

I would like to direct you to the following analogy:

Wikipedia is like having a friend that knows a little bit about everything. Sure, you don't go to him for a detailed analysis of anything, but in terms of a broad stroke general idea, there's not really much harm in it. - A Scholar Once Said

Would I include Wikipedia in a bibliography or a works cited page if I were in graduate school? Absolutely not. But if I want to know the difference between whole foods and organic foods, or the bassist's name in a band I barely know, or the origins of Beirut/Beer Pong, or a detailed account of the developments of ethnic conflicts currently boiling over in the Middle East, well why the hell not Wikipedia? The real beauty of the whole thing is; I only have to look in one place. Don't know the answer? Wiki-fucking-pedia motherfucker!

Unless you're in school. Yah see, i'm not in school, so I'm not stricken with the burden of proof shit that seems to hold up oh so many scholars. Suckers.

Is Wikipedia inherantly bad because it bills itself as an encyclopedia when it is not comprised entirely of confirmed facts? I say no. Are we even sure there is such a thing as fact? How does one confirm fact as fact? And don't even get me started on the scientific method! One man's tragedy is another man's triumph. Another man's rainy day is some woman's holiday. What? Am I making myself clear?

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

I've had a similar conversation recently. Every fact that is posted on Wikipedia has to be approved by thousands of people before it actually appears, so in a way, it's just a popular belief website (which doesn't make it true). But what is a reliable source then? No one knows. The only truly reliable source is your own five senses, meaning that you'd have to see it to know whether it's definately fact or fiction (and even that is highly questioned by many philosopher types). What I'm trying to say is Wikipedia is from the streets. It ain't got no flying shoes.