Re: Fascinating quotation

[Mark Funk <mefunk@mail.med.cornell.edu>]

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

> From: "David Goodman" <David.Goodman@liu.edu>
> To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>, <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
> Subject: RE: Fascinating quotation
> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 00:13:12 EST
>
> Dear Mark,
>
> You would have us believe that medical libraries never discontinue
> periodicals, and, if they did, availability elsewhere would not be a
> factor.
>
> First, even for a truly first rate medical library like Cornell there are
> presumably some biomedicine related journals which you do not get, and for
> which you rely on document delivery, from, among other places, the nlm. 
> Unless there is a sharp discriminating factor between the worthwhile and
> the worthless rather than an imperceptible transition, there must also be
> a few journals of about the same importance to which you do subscribe.  I
> wonder if you mean you would not drop even the most scientifically
> insignificant biomedical journal if 90% of its articles were CERTAINLY
> available on line at the nlm?
>
> Second, there are many fields of some relation to medicine at least
> occasionally. A journal on the subject of bioethics, say, which you would
> certainly get, might have any article referring to any imaginable major or
> minor journal in philosophy. Surely you collect only the more important
> philosophy titles, not them all, and would discontinue them much more
> readily than titles in medicine, and availability elsewhere would be one
> ofthe factors.
>
> Third, I think the same argument you make also applies to key libraries of
> major international status in their own subject fields.  Chemistry
> librarians regard their subject and its journals to be every bit as
> important as you view medicine. They too will not discontinue anything
> nontrivial in their central area until it becomes available otherwise--
> then, there is a level of low use and quality that they will consider. 
> Further, just as philosophy is a subject of secondary importance to you,
> medicine might be a very secondary subject to them.
>
> Finally, I can offer you direct proof that some medical research libraries
> would discontinue some medical titles.  They already have. All faculty in
> medical schools do research, but there are many medical schools supported
> by a considerably smaller library than yours. They, obviously, do not
> subscribe to some of the biomedical titles that you subscribe to.
>
> Dr. David Goodman
> dgoodman@liu.edu