 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jul 6th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 44 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
Quite the forensic debate topic here! Excellent points all 'round.
Haven't seen Bruce Catton or Shelby Foote mentioned yet. How 'bout those guys?
In my mind, bias might be interpreted as propaganda unless the author openly states his/her intentions, in a forward or preface. Kind of like the Declaration of Independence! Without alerting the reader as to his/her political/sociological leanings, the writing can almost become an insidious epistle, a vehicle of subterfuge, something misleading.
On the other hand, this "declaration of intent" could be construed as the imposition of of political correctness on authors so that some thin-skinned reader doesn't get upset if the writer seems to support readers "from the opposite camp's" beliefs.
It's up to us, the readers, to hear and understand, through discourse such as we're employing right here and now -- as Jefferson hoped -- as many viewpoints and interpretations as possible in order to come to the fullest understanding possible and make the best "democratic" decisions, or interpretations of facts, that we can.
ArtorBart