RE: Fascinating quotation

["David Goodman" <David.Goodman@liu.edu>]

1. Speaking literally, the following is indeed true:
 
> "However, journal cancellations by medical libraries up to now have
> absolutely nothing to do with the NIH proposal, since it is not yet in
> effect, and may not be for some time."
 
 I suggested that this will not necessarily be the case in future years,
and the original posting and the above comment does not contradict me.
Neither of us knows what will be the exact meaning of "some time."
 
 2. The response confirms my posting. Only a few libraries still have the
ones at the lowest level. This then leaves the next level up, and so on.
 
3. The quotation 
 
>  I don't care what other subject libraries do. Again, I was referring
> only to medical libraries and the NIH proposal.
 
 is "difficult to get across" because it contradicts all experience.. It
would only make sense if medicial journals were bought only by medical
libraries, and non-medical journals were never bought by medical
libraries. Neither is correct, and the catalog of any library will show
it.
 
Though the author does not ask me, I do apologize for using names of
individuals and the name of a representative library when there was no
need to do so. I do not consider this a personal argument between us, and
I suggest that our real views on what will happen and how to respond are
probably almost identical.

Dr. David Goodman
Associate Professor
Palmer School of Library and Information Science
Long Island University
dgoodman@liu.edu

________________________________

From: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu on behalf of Mark Funk
Sent: Wed 12/22/2004 11:39 PM
To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Subject: Re: Fascinating quotation

The arguments in David's post have nothing to do with what I said.

1. I have never tried to make people believe that medical libraries never
cancel periodicals. I was referring to the unlikely possibility of
cancellations by medical libraries resulting from the NIH proposal. Any
other interpretation of what I said is false. Of course medical libraries
cancel journals, based on quality, usefulness, price, and appropriateness.
However, journal cancellations by medical libraries up to now have
absolutely nothing to do with the NIH proposal, since it is not yet in
effect, and may not be for some time.

2. My colleagues in medical libraries can back me up when I state that the
"most scientifically insignificant biomedical journals" were cancelled
years ago, long before we heard of the NIH proposal.

3. I don't care what other subject libraries do. Again, I was referring
only to medical libraries and the NIH proposal. This seems to be difficult
to get across.

Finally, here is a definition of the Straw Man Fallacy:

"The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a
person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or
misrepresented version of that position. This sort of 'reasoning' has the
following pattern:

1. Person A has position X.
2. Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
3. Person B attacks position Y.
4. Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.

This sort of 'reasoning' is fallacious because attacking a distorted
version of a position simply does not constitute an attack on the position
itself."

Mark Funk
Head, Collection Development
Weill Cornell Medical Library
1300 York Avenue
New York, NY 10021
212-746-6073
mefunk@mail.med.cornell.edu