Talk:Appeal to Consequences
From EvoWiki
Removed section:
When taken to its ultimate conclusion, one ends up with something like Plato's Royal Lie. This is from Plato's dialogue Republic, which outlines his idea of an ideal society. In it, the sacred books of his society, the works of Homer and Hesiod, are to be banned, because they contain lots of unedifying things like heroes lamenting and gods laughing. In their place is to be an official religion that was designed to demonstrate the legitimacy of the society's rulers -- a religion that Plato called a "royal lie".
I do not see how this is relevant to the subject of the article. This paragraph needed to be clarified and expanded or to be removed. Since I don't see a way of expanding it to make it relevant, I removed it. --Derek 20:50, 25 Nov 2005 (GMT)
This looks to be much more an attack on critics of evolution than a definition or encyclopedia entry. If you are truly trying to write an objective reference work, you might replace some of your quotations with others which arise in other situations. Whatever polemical intent you have will still be there, only not so glaringly obvious. As it stands, the article looks amateurish -- A reader.
Okay, I see now that this isn't "Wikipedia." I clicked on a link thinking that it was taking me to the real Wikipedia. But your site isn't an objective encyclopedia and isn't trying to be. I tried to get rid of my comment but it wouldn't disappear. -- A reader.
