[Vision2020] Citing Primary Sources via Secondary Sources

lfalen lfalen at turbonet.com
Fri Sep 19 09:42:48 PDT 2008 

Speaking of plagiarism. When I was in grad school a  PhD psychology  student sect up some empty rat cages in our lab. He then went to the library and dry labed his research. He never used the rat cages and wrote his PhD  theses in one month.
Roger
-----Original message-----
From: Jeff Harkins jeffh at moscow.com
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 10:53:41 -0700
To: nickgier at roadrunner.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Citing Primary Sources via Secondary Sources

> Nick,
> 
> I provided the link to the Law School Honor Code for two reasons:
> 
> 1. So that Shoue would know what his obligations were, with respect 
> to law studies, so he would not make the same mistake again.
> 
> 2. It was a convenient local application of the standards of 
> plagiarism for those that are not familiar with.
> 
> It is clear that you and Campbell need a refresher course on 
> plagiarism.  It is very surprising to me that both of you are failing 
> to recognize that the person injured here was the author of the 
> source that Schoe failed to cite.
> 
> Can I presume that the standards of plagiarism are lower for 
> philosophy writings.  I am very surprised that an Ethics  instructor 
> would not see the issue here.
> 
> This event can be classified as "online plagiarism".  Wikipedia 
> offers a comprehensive explanation:
> 
> [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarism]
> 
> Online plagiarism
> 
> Since it is very easy to steal content from the web by simply copying 
> and pasting, the problem of online plagiarism is 
> growing.[<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed>citation 
> needed] This phenomenon, also known as content scraping, is affecting 
> both established sites [3] and blogs [4].
> Free online tools are becoming available to help identify plagiarism 
> [5], and there is a range of approaches that attempt to limit online 
> copying, such as disabling 
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Right-click#Common_mouse_operations>right 
> clicking and placing warning banners regarding copyrights on web 
> pages. Instances of plagiarism that involve copyright violation may 
> be addressed by the rightful content owners sending a 
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/DMCA>DMCA removal notice to the 
> offending site-owner, or to the 
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/ISP>ISP that is hosting the 
> offending site.
> It is important to reiterate that plagiarism is not the mere copying 
> of text, but the presentation of another's ideas as one's own, 
> regardless of the specific words or constructs used to express that 
> idea. In contrast, many so-called plagiarism detection services can 
> only detect blatant word-for-word copies of text.
> The cite that Schoe indicated he obtained his info from has very 
> clear policies about use of the material obtained from the cite. One 
> of those is to provide a citation for the author of the material.
> 
> I have provided all the links. Check it out or not - I don't really care.
> 
>   At 08:43 AM 9/18/2008, you wrote:
> >Hi Jeff,
> >
> >Gandhi scholars routinely cite Gandhi from the primary source (e.g., 
> >Young India, September 10, 1921) without having gone to the primary 
> >source and without citing a secondary source.  Only when I was India 
> >on sabbatical could I sit down with the Young India volumes and 
> >check the citations.
> >
> >Andreas was not operating in an academic setting, and he is not 
> >under the purview of the Law School Honor Code.  If you actually 
> >brought this before the Law School, they would think the same of you as we do.
> >
> >Nick
> >---- Jeff Harkins <jeffh at moscow.com> wrote:
> > > Sorry Nick,
> > >
> > > Your little trick to bring my offlist reply to you back on to the viz
> > > was anticipated - and reveals a great deal about your character. I
> > > know, it was an oversight, right?
> > >
> > > If you can't find the time to review the material that has already
> > > been posted, I am not going to spoon feed it to you.
> > >
> > > All the issues are fully presented; all materials linked to my
> > > position provided.
> > >
> > > All comments are available.
> > >
> > > Thanks, but I have provided full back up of my position.
> > >
> > > Oh - no more offlist correspondence with you.
> > >
> > > You apparently don't really understand plagiarism - here is how it is
> > > defined in the Law School Honor Code:
> > >
> > > >Plagiarism. No student shall claim as his or her own original work
> > > >the research, ideas or
> > > >writing of another, or copy in whole or in part or in effect from
> > > >the work of another, without
> > > >clearly identifying it as the work of another. Paraphrasing without
> > > >acknowledgement of
> > > >authorship is a form of plagiarism. Paraphrasing is the close
> > > >restatement of another's idea or
> > > >using approximately the language of the original. [Section IIB, page 64]
> > >
> > > Thus, your use of secondary sources in your writings, which are
> > > by-products of primary sources, would require citations.  Do you
> > > provide citations for your use of secondary sources?
> > >
> > > Mr. Shoue paraphased, but provided no citations whatsoever.
> > >
> > > I think we are done.
> > >
> > > Bye.
> > >
> > > At 12:02 PM 9/17/2008, you wrote:
> > > >Hi Jeff,
> > > >
> > > >I'm bringing this back on the Vision because of the seriousness of
> > > >the charges you made against Andreas.
> > > >
> > > >You have ducked the question I posed to you: what is the difference
> > > >between what I did in my Gandhi research and what Andreas did?  I
> > > >don't care to go through the details of what you debated.  That's
> > > >simply not necessary. I just want you to do tell me, Andreas, and
> > > >others on this list in concise terms what the difference is.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >Let me clarify one important thing.  You somehow have the notion
> > > >that reviewers of my Gandhi work checked it for plagiarism. No such
> > > >thing ever happened.  As I stated in my first post, Gandhi scholars
> > > >quote the primary sources through secondary sources all the time.
> > > >
> > > >This is a serious charge that you have leveled.  You have to back it
> > > >up or apologize big time.
> > > >
> > > >Nick
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >---- Jeff Harkins <jeffh at moscow.com> wrote:
> > > > > I am going offlist again.
> > > > >
> > > > > Schou is the only one who can know what he did and what his intent
> > > > > was.  I can say that if he had submitted his original post to me as
> > > > > written (in an academic setting) I would have moved forward with
> > > > > charges of plagiarism.
> > > > >
> > > > > Since you haven't had time to go through the full dialogue, we
> > > > > probably won't get anywhere by focusing on details.
> > > > >
> > > > > As I have pointed out numerous times, this is a problem he created,
> > > > > not me.  Read the details, get back to me and we can chat offlist.
> > > > > Pay particular attention to the material prepared by Alperin-Sheriff
> > > > > and the Terms of Use of the McClatchy site (which he admits he
> > > > > used).  He doesn't seem to appreciate how reckless and careless his
> > > > > actions were and how significant the consequences can be (ie, Biden's
> > > > > use of Kinnock's speech).
> > > > >
> > > > > All I have done is point out to him that he needs to approach the Law
> > > > > School Administration and deal with the matter with them. He is
> > > > > subject to the Law School Honor Code.
> > > > >
> > > > > What he chooses to do to resolve this is up to him.  I plan no action
> > > > > on my part.
> > > > >
> > > > > As to a comparison with your work - no, I am not investing time in
> > > > > that comparison.  I trust that the reviewers of your work handle that.
> > > > >
> > > > > At 10:57 AM 9/17/2008, you wrote:
> > > > > >Hi Jeff,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >This is response is no response.  Would you care to distinguish
> > > > between what
> > > > > >Andreas did and what I've done for 18 years in my Gandhi research?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Nick
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >---- Jeff Harkins <jeffh at moscow.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > At 10:27 AM 9/17/2008, you wrote:
> > > > > > > >Greetings:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >"I've not followed the exchange between Andreas and Jeff 
> > in complete
> > > > > > > >detail ..."
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > That more or less covers my response.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >I'm preparing for a keynote address that I will give on Gandhi's
> > > > > > > >birthday on Oct. 2 at San Diego State University.  When I first
> > > > > > > >started doing my Gandhi research in the early 1990s, it was very
> > > > > > > >difficult to get the primary sources, even through interlibrary
> > > > > > > >loan.  Until I went on sabbatical to India, I relied on secondary
> > > > > > > >sources, especially very fine anthologies of passages arranged by
> > > > > > > >subject and fully documented.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >When I finally got to India, I was able to sit down and check out
> > > > > > > >references and read for context in Gandhi's Collected Works (100
> > > > > > > >volumes!) and the journals Young India and 
> > Harijan.  Very few Gandhi
> > > > > > > >scholars read every page of these huge volumes. That is 
> > why we have
> > > > > > > >bibliographers.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >Gandhi kept meticulous records of everything that happened in his
> > > > > > > >ashrams, and most of that does not make for very edifying
> > > > > > > >reading.  The Collected Works have a very good index, so that was
> > > > > > > >very handy to find the passages that I needed for a 
> > particular topic.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >As soon as finish this post, I will go downstairs to my reading
> > > > > > > >couch and re-read the fabulous anthologies that take me 
> > right to the
> > > > > > > >passages that I want to review, and perhaps I'll find 
> > some new good
> > > > > > > >ones.  The Collected Works are now on line, but they are even more
> > > > > > > >clumsy to use than the actual books themselves.  For crucial
> > > > > > > >passages I will double check the original references 
> > again on line.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >I believe this is what Andreas did, and if I'm right, 
> > then I'm just
> > > > > > > >as guilty of plagiarism as he is.  I wouldn't be invited to San
> > > > > > > >Diego if that is what my colleagues think I did.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >Nick Gier
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >=======================================================
> > > > > > > >  List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > > > > > > >  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > > > > > > >                http://www.fsr.net
> > > > > > > >           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > > > > > > >=======================================================
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > =======================================================
> > > > > > >  List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > > > > > >  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > > > > > >                http://www.fsr.net
> > > > > > >           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > > > > > > =======================================================
> > > > >
> 
>

More information about the Vision2020 mailing list