May I quote you?

I'm not going to go off on this again, but I noticed the following picture in the paper yesterday:



Just thought that was a little amusing, given that I'd just blogged on the Someone Sez method of argument. Oh, I will comment on a couple of comments to the original post.

First, I agree with Ang about the, "I can outshout you, so I'm right," method of argument. I think pretty much everyone (other than radio and TV hosts) agrees with that one.

As for Mel's point about the usefulness of a good quote: couldn't agree more. My favorite thing about writing papers in grad school was the opportunity to unearth obscure quotes from famous figures. What I was emphasizing was that just repeating a quote, even from a respected authority, does not prove the argument. Of course you are on a little safer ground, I think, if you're quoting an authority on the matter at hand (e.g., quoting Alan Greenspan on the dangers of inflation), but you've still got some work to do. As an example, here are the two quotes I used to open my dissertation [question was whether committees are good (small numbers of specialists make good policy) or bad (small numbers of greedy folks get pork for their consituents)]:

Congress in session is Congress on public exhibition, whilst Congress in its committee-rooms is Congress at work. Woodrow Wilson

They [legislators] spring into action with uncritical zeal, determined from the outset to win for the complainant because he is a constituent, not because his cause is known to be just. Sorry, don't have the original author and I'm too lazy to look up the source.

I then spent MANY pages trying (I really did try, I promise) to distinguish between these two alternatives. Final conclusion: no clear winner, but the evidence for the pork barrel hypothesis was weak in most areas (other than agriculture).

Anyway, that's my final word on quotegate.