Talk:Ipse-dixitism

Self-ref

This article seems to violate the policy against self-references (that is references to Wikipedia within articles). Also the survey of WP pages appears to be original research. Not huge flaws for fairly useful article, but I suppose they should be remedied.--Chris 16:40, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Huh?

A policy against self-references? I don't know anything about that. But I do know there's a Wikipedia article about Wikipedia you might want to complain about. Anyway, I see no problem with the self-references in this article, given that self-referentiality is an element of ipsedixitism and so part of the subject of the article.

If faced with naïve Ipsedixitism, one solution is Socratic Irony, as this approach is likely to encourage the dogmatist to elaborate away from simple re-assertion of dogma, or to realize that assumptions have been made. Wow, what a mouthful. What exactly does this mean? (I'm not a native English speaker, but I think this means: tell whoever asserted the ipsedixitism to elaborate with references other than him/herself as a basis for his/her argument. True? Demf 17:58, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I can only think that all the self-references are supposed to be a clever illustration of the principle. I'm removing them. TheMadBaron 21:08, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Beautiful irony.

Section 5 is the most gorgeous thing ever. 75.73.11.30 (talk) 07:48, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

poor example

the example given: "The economy needs more scientists, so expansion of science education will boost the future economy" is not necessary unfounded or dogmatic.

the economy is stated as both having a need for scientists and further explaining that more scientists will boost the future economy. hence 'the economy is in need of a boost; one that can be provided for by an increase in the number of scientists as a contributor to the economy's growth.'

hence the proposition that is the mentioned example requires no additional arguments.

it is not an ipse-dixitism or bare assertion. 80.3.154.152 (talk) 18:12, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

a better example would be "the economy needs more scientists, so the science education will be expanded"; where the argument for the relation between the economy and science education in terms the economy's need is not expressed.

an example of a 'double ipse-dixitism':

"the sky needs clouds, so bring the kettle to boil." 

where the example requires two arguments, one in relation to the sky's need of clouds, and another that is more subtle; knowing that clouds are made of evaporated water and that boiled water gives off steam, the argument that clouds need kettles to be boiled is also absent from the example of the 'double ipse-dixitism'. 80.3.154.152 (talk) 22:07, 4 April 2011 (UTC) 22:10, 4 April 2011 (UTC) (typo) 80.3.154.152 (talk) 22:14, 4 April 2011 (UTC)