Wikipedia talk:Horns of a dilemma

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] An edit

I rv this edit [1] and was sorry to have to do so. I've upheld the principle that anyone can edit this page -- and that includes anon editors, essays, and policies.

This particular text, though, is pretty much an exact quote from Pirsig's book. Pirsig, in ZAAMM, states Phaedrus's position and also comments heavily on it, showing his disagreement. At the same time, much of the thrust of the book is that Pirsig comes to acknowledge that Phaedrus is not truly a different person but a part of Pirsig, himself. So, he presents Phaedrus' position very strongly and honestly. My adaptation was merely to abridge a very long passage to limit it to Phaedrus. I haven't rewritten Pirsig.

One may quibble with Pirsig's prose but I chose it to illustrate this point -- that logic must trump rhetoric in an academic world -- for good reason. Anyone is welcome to enhance the presentation or add to the commentary, which is for the purpose of further explaining and strengthening the point. But I strongly suggest we gain for ourselves no particular merit by attempting to rewrite the master. John Reid ° 19:22, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

This is the single worst Wikipedia entry I have ever seen. Why the heck is this here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.111.251.229 (talk) 15:35, 1 November 2007 (UTC)