Here’s the FACT though…..In the almost three years I have been posting here, I HAVE NEVER PLAGIARIZED A THING. You got that? I post quotes from primarily Protestant Scholars to back up my points and EVERY TIME, I list them along with the page number. You have falsely accused me or at least alluded to me as a possible plagiarizer.-snip-
Pick out a phrase that you think I didn’t write and simply plug it into a search engine. If you can find anything that I have ever plagiarized I will not post on this thread for three months. If you aren’t willing to take me up on the offer then I demand an apology.
Well, with this response post, I've given this guy three months off from CARM. After three years of posting, I think he's earned a vacation.
Posts
4 comments:
Good subject actually.
Plagiarism is defined as “the act of using another person's words or ideas without giving credit to that person,” (Merriam-Webster) though as WP substantiates, “the notion remains problematic with nebulous boundaries.”
It (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarism) also states, The modern concept of plagiarism as immoral and originality as an ideal emerged in Europe only in the 18th century, particularly with the Romantic movement, while in the previous centuries authors and artists were encouraged to "copy the masters as closely as possible" and avoid "unnecessary invention."
I think copied material should be referenced, as i see you do, and fairly original specific arguments, or at least such should be acknowledged as not being your own if we cannot remember, but not all that we make our arguments from, as to some degree "we are all plagiarists"
I was charged by an RC awhile back on another forum with plagiarism and copyright infringement for citing Bellarmine (who contradicted the poster), because while i cited his work as the source, i did not cite the researcher who found it, which i should have per forum rules i found out, yet as regards copyright, neither of which were under it.
But we actually have an RCA, under the superior moral guidance of the RCC, teaching what is acceptable if it is for use in pro Catholic apologetics:
"What I would suggest, if you wish to cut down on your response time, is to steal stuff from other folks. Steal things from my newsletters. Go to Catholic.com (Catholic Answers website) and use their search engine to look for articles on whatever topic you're discussing. Don't hesitate to lift verbiage from an article here and an article there.
If you want to cite your source fine, but if you want to leave that out- I don't see any problem, as long as you're doing it in private correspondence." - "Apologetics for The Masses" by John Martignoni (http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/index.php?itemid=2550)
http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/index.php?itemid=2550
Wow, I wrote that entry and don't even remember it. LOL
I think I'll repost it over here.
I am not surprised it was from you. Two are better than one...(Eccl. 4:9)
thanks again for the link.
Post a Comment