Re: Virtue Ethics, Deontological Ethics, and Biotechnology

Greg,
Don't get your water hot. I reported what a sociologist told me, person
to person. When I began teaching at Pierce College, the departmental
setup put psychology, sociology and philosophy together. Then psychology
was split off. But there were still 3 psychologists, 3 sociologists and 3
philosophers in adjacent offices. We got along well.

I'm not a sociologist. I am not familiar with the sociological journals
and texts. So I do not have a basis on which to calculate a ratio of
offenders. Since I last saw my friend more than twenty years ago, the
situation may have changed. I would hope for the better, but the number
of serious charges noted in various scientific fields is not encouraging.

"Many" = numerous. I did not say most, which would have been accurate
neither to my friend's statement nor to reality. Given the number of
sociologists, a minority can still be described as many.

I have no problem with restatement. There's a point to Whitehead's
statement: "The safest general characterization of the European
philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to
Plato." I recognize my debt to Plato, to Augustine, to Calvin, as
distinct from the Aristotle, Aquinas pattern. I note that Luther was more
Platonic, but Melancthon gave Lutheranism a more Thomistic twist.

Restatement as a reminder or as the basis for critique or extension is
clearly relevant, but such will acknowledge the source. Repetition
without acknowledgement, but with changes in the language to avoid the
charge of plagiarism, is reprehensible. I'm sure you agree. However, the
claim that A merely restated B's work using different language is not
something I would expect published. It would be part of the professional
scuttlebutt
Dave.

On Sat, 13 May 2006 17:52:35 -0400 (EDT) Gregory Arago
<gregoryarago@yahoo.ca> writes:
Please excuse if I notice perhaps a trend. Is it slam-the-sociologist
week?

"I'm reminded of a statement by a sociological colleague who noted that
there were many of his discipline who were actively publishing the
same-old-same-old using different terminology in the hope that they would
reap an evanescent glory by having someone cite their label." - Dave

Either please quote where this slanderous statement is printed or dilute
the defamation towards sociological unoriginality. Surely there are many
respectable scholars whose teacher-based education distinguishes them
from those with a research-based education, wherein restating what has
already been said in a concise and coherent manner is appropriate and
worthy of honour. 'Publish or perish' is not merely a physics PhD's
premonition.

Surely we need more sociologists of ethics too?!

Arago

"D. F. Siemens, Jr."

Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo! Mail.
Received on Sun May 14 00:26:47 2006