--- In quizbowl_at_y..., Matt Weiner <darwins_bulldog1138_at_y...> wrote: > There are barely enough entries on that site to fill > two tournaments' worth of good philosophy questions. I > surely HOPE it is not popular. Probably true that it doesn't have much. I think I meant to cite The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy at http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/ Still, looking at their wanted articles list (http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/desired.htm), one may or may not detect the biases of such sources. Since we're bashing web sources, another one I'll mention is the 1908 edition of the Catholic Encyclopedia at http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/ It can be a decent source for certain things such as hagiography, religious history, and Biblical trivia, provided you have an idea of what is askable in the field and just don't go after what has the longest entry as a judge of what's important. Writing Catholic theology questions out of it tends to be bad though, in that it is ignorant of Vatican II and its aftermath and can be outdated. For example, the sacrament is found under the article "extreme unction," although clicking on its current more correct name "anointing of the sick" directs you to "extreme unction." The article on "ecumenism" is probably a better example of an article with outdated sentiments. I recognize questions written from it occasionally. Usually, its the ones with outdated theology. It's like writing science out of an edition of Encyclopedia Britannica that is just as old. Anthony, practicing Catholic...(why do people always look at me funny when they find out I'm religious?)...quizbowl deconstructionist [cool site of the hour: http://www.engrish.com]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:46 AM EST EST