Hacker News Reader

The biggest problem with Wikipedia is not that entries about current politics may be biased by national/religious propaganda.

The real problem is when the political propaganda influences the scientific entries. For example here I loosely refer to entries on evolution and pharmacology.

But, perhaps Wikipedia handles this better than other encyclopedias?

View on HN

My biggest problem is when politics influences articles about history. Trying to smash all previous ideology into modern factions is insane.

True, but has it not always been the case that writers have tended to view the past through a lens shaped by their contemporary mores? When I studied history (we used Books -- it was that long ago) I was taught that the development of arguments about a historical thing was part and parcel of the knowledge of that thing (rather like the article suggests). The critical evaluation of historiography must take into account the prevailing attitudes of the time as well as any other political biases. Reading around helps to elucidate these, so crucially one never relies on a single source.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com