Re: Finding information on the Internet

[Tim Folkerts <tfolkert@FHSU.EDU>]

> If you are going to rely on "secondary characteristics"
> you might as well hang a sign around your neck saying
> "I am not a scientist".

I have to disagree with this strongly!  Or at least question your meaning
:-)

There are many places I will never go, many adventures I will never
experience, many experiments I will never perform.  Not because of lack of
ability or desire, but merely a lack of time.  Experiences I deem important
enough I will do myself.  As for the rest, I will either have to remain
ignorant, or take someone else's word for it.

Since I like to know things, the challenge is then, whom do I trust for
information?  Yes, it is "lazy" to choose an source of information based on
secondary factors, but it is wasteful to ignore secondary features.

So yes, "relying" on secondary characteristics "instead of" the primary
characteristics is very poor practice.  But ignoring everything except the
must fundamental information is also poor practice.  You mention the
"black/white" fallacy, but there is also the "argument of the beard"
fallacy - how many whiskers does it take to make a beard?  How much
reliance on secondary characteristics is unacceptable?

It appears you have to make judgements about when to rely on your
judgements!


*  Suppose I want an accurate voltage measurement.  I go to pick out a
voltmeter, and the shelf has a $800 Keithley meter, a $9 Radioshack meter,
and a 40 yr old analog meter.  I choose the Keithley.  Not because I have
checked any of the calibrations, but because I simply "judged a book by its
cover".  Brand name, cost and newness don't guarantee accuracy, but they do
correlate strongly with accuracy.

I typically only become suspicious of the measurement if it leads to a
contradiction with some other "authoritative" result.  I can't afford to
spend the time checking the calibrations of every piece of equipment I use.

* Suppose I want to look for terrorists trying to blow up airplanes.  Is it
"unscientific" to concentrate attention on a 20 year old Arabic male
travelling one way carrying a backpack?  These are secondary
characteristics.

* suppose I want to find a reliable website.  Is it unscientific to look
for
> > *  Is the author identifiable? Look for links that say "Who We
> > Are," "About This Site, " or something similar.
a person who takes responsibility for the information

> > * What is the author's background? (e.g. experience, credentials,
> > occupation, have they written other publications on the topic?)
a person who has the training to understand the information?

> > * Does the author cite his or her sources?
references

> > * Is this site linked to often by other sites?
citations & peer review

> > * Do links on this site lead to other reputable sites?
agreement with other research

> > * Are there spelling errors or incorrect use of grammar?
attention to detail


Since a web search typically returns 100's or 1,000's of pages, there is no
way to look at all of them, let alone check them for accuracy.  So first
you screen them on the order that the search engine returns them, then by
the brief summary provided, then by a glance at the page.  The more you now
about the subject, the more you look at the actual content.  The less you
know, the more you have to rely on other's opinions & secondary
characteristics.


Timothy Folkerts

Department of Physics
Fort Hays State University
Hays, KS  67601
785-628-4501

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do
nothing." - Edmund Burke