They claim that they did their own research to verify the facts, but if they
did research and fully understood the facts, then why would they choose to
copy someone else's words instead of stating in their own words? Unless they
don't know how to write in English. Wouldn't it be only natural for someone
to write something in his own words if he felt that he made enough
contributions of his own to the ideas or to the facts?
There is much to be analyzed about their gesture of plagiarizing. It shows
that they don't really know much. Anyone who has done substantial research
of their own would not choose to copy someone else's words. That would be
discrediting their own research, knowledge, and understanding. It would make
no sense, unless: 1. they didn't do their own research, or 2. they wanted to
pay their respect to the original writer. In this particular case of British
dossier, the second possibility is void since they didn't credit the
original writer. The first one is the only scenario that I can think of.
-Dyske
Reading the British Dossier
-
Type: discussion
Comments
I agree…
it stinks…
marc
> They claim that they did their own research to verify the facts, but if
they
> did research and fully understood the facts, then why would they choose to
> copy someone else's words instead of stating in their own words? Unless
they
> don't know how to write in English. Wouldn't it be only natural for
someone
> to write something in his own words if he felt that he made enough
> contributions of his own to the ideas or to the facts?
>
> There is much to be analyzed about their gesture of plagiarizing. It shows
> that they don't really know much. Anyone who has done substantial research
> of their own would not choose to copy someone else's words. That would be
> discrediting their own research, knowledge, and understanding. It would
make
> no sense, unless: 1. they didn't do their own research, or 2. they wanted
to
> pay their respect to the original writer. In this particular case of
British
> dossier, the second possibility is void since they didn't credit the
> original writer. The first one is the only scenario that I can think of.
>
> -Dyske
>
>
> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> -> post: [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>
>