QUOTE(thekohser @ Tue 3rd August 2010, 3:48pm)
![*](style_images/brack/post_snapback.gif)
QUOTE(Jon Awbrey @ Tue 3rd August 2010, 10:52am)
![*](style_images/brack/post_snapback.gif)
Once you open your eyes to the presence of the phenomenon, the next couple of questions are:
- What is the belief that these wannabelievers so desperately wannabelieve?
- And why?
- That a volunteer-generated encyclopedia will be better than all other encyclopedias, and that said encyclopedia will help and empower ordinary people in profound ways.
- We live in a world where a very few hold much of the wealth and power. By making a transfer of knowledge management from the restrictive wealthy/powerful minority to the impoverished/weak majority, there will be a more equitable, peaceful, productive global society that emerges.
I honestly believe these are the sorts of answers that Wikipediots would provide to you, Jon. I don't honestly believe in the rationale behind these beliefs.
That sounds a bit closer to what a Wikipedim, Wikipedist, or Wikipedyterian might articulate as espoused tenets of belief, but those aren't the forces that drive souls to Wikiperdition. What we need to excavate is buried far deeper and dimmer in the psyche than the brands of fully conscious, semi-rational beliefs that a person might be capable of stating in so many words, since by those words the beliefs in question are made more available to critical reflection. (Not always, of course — with too many reps they can become mantras.)
Try starting from
Alexander Bain's definition of “belief†— expressed in gender-neutral terms as
“That On Which A Person Is Prepared To Act†(TOWAPIPTA) — and think about the complex of largely unexamined beliefs that would lead a person to fall for the usual run of "bank examiner", "found money", "pigeon drop", or "unclaimed inheritance" scams.
Jon Awbrey