pro libertate net - Latest Comments

Re: Skimmed: Counterexamples in Analysis

Marko Karbevski — Wed, 04 Nov 2015 06:49:36 -0000

This book serves more as something to look up when you need it, it is not made to be read cover to cover nor for anyone to study from.

Re: Read: Style -- The Art of Writing Well

IyelBey — Thu, 08 May 2014 18:24:01 -0000

I prefer footnotes. They are right there when they are needed and relevant.

Re: Read: Style -- The Art of Writing Well

Melusine — Sun, 04 May 2014 08:48:23 -0000

Well, i would say, if the purpose of the notes, end or foot, is purely for reference purposes, endnotes are best, as readers not interested in the reference part can ignore them and read without having pages cut short by numerous footnotes they are not interested in to start with. However, if the notes are adding information to the text on the page thy relate to, footnotes are better as they spare the readers the need to flip to the end of the chapter/book.
My preferred option is a mix of both, as fits the need, with a clearly identifiable difference in marking, i.e. letters for footnotes and numerals for endnotes.

Re: Read: Style -- The Art of Writing Well

Olivia P. Tallet — Fri, 02 May 2014 23:30:24 -0000

Footnotes work much better for me. I is disrupting having to look for then in a long list at the end of the book. As footnotes you have the option of reading them right there when it's called for, or just skip them altogether if you are not interested. Convenience.

Re: Read: Style -- The Art of Writing Well

BroVic — Thu, 01 May 2014 13:44:36 -0000

I tend to use footnotes, instead of endnotes - asking a reader to flip pages is most unkind. However, in a 2 - 3 page document, I might hazard to use them, particularly if the explanatory note is rather lengthy.

Re: Read: Style -- The Art of Writing Well

GR8LISTENER — Tue, 29 Apr 2014 02:28:42 -0000

Footnotes - if brief - are powerful.
Endnotes IMHO can be eliminated with a good glossary or bibliography. Again, with links - hyperlinks - you are miles ahead with the ebook. GR8 article.

Re: Read: Style -- The Art of Writing Well

Ruud Reijmerink — Sun, 27 Apr 2014 13:53:32 -0000

use the footnote! It gives less distraction.

Re: Read: Style -- The Art of Writing Well

Ron Callari — Sun, 27 Apr 2014 09:31:54 -0000

I think both are outdated unless you're writing a scholarly composition or thesis of some sort. Today with the Internet, hyperlinks have taken the place of both IMHO.

Re: Read: Style -- The Art of Writing Well

Omar Habayeb — Sun, 27 Apr 2014 09:13:03 -0000

I actually prefer CLIFF NOTES! =) But will use footnotes if I have to!

Re: Read: Style -- The Art of Writing Well

Barbara Klein — Sun, 27 Apr 2014 09:04:16 -0000

For easier and focused reading I prefer footnotes, however when they are too long, you might as well pack them in endnotes.

Re: Read: Style -- The Art of Writing Well

Ivor Kellock — Fri, 25 Apr 2014 14:52:20 -0000

foot note every time - write with your own style - we live in a modern world where personal expression counts for everything ;-) Ivor

Re: Read: Style -- The Art of Writing Well

jimwirshing — Fri, 25 Apr 2014 13:08:08 -0000

Both endnotes and footnotes add to the authority of what is written, however, I've never found it convenient to flip back-and-forth to check endnotes. Give me footnotes, or give me death (with apologies to Patrick Henry).

Re: Read: Style -- The Art of Writing Well

cdogzilla — Fri, 25 Apr 2014 11:51:53 -0000

I may be an outlier here, but I enjoy footnotes when they are truly interesting as an aside from the text. I don't have much patience for endnotes. That's one area though that ebooks have changed -- when you can jump via link to the note, and jump back to where you were reading without flipping pages hunting for the endnote and accidentally ending up on the notes a chapter ahead and wondering what the note had to do with what you were reading, it's a much more user-friendly experience.

Re: Read: Style -- The Art of Writing Well

Austin Iuliano — Fri, 25 Apr 2014 11:11:37 -0000

Honestly I find both are distracting and rarely should be used. If you have to use one though, please use a footnote.

Re: Read: How to Read a Book

Dennis A. V. Dittrich — Sun, 29 Dec 2013 11:47:17 -0000

I usually use this here only for book keeping. But you are right, maybe I should write more, and maybe teachability is a topic on which I could elaborate a bit... Let's see what the next days and the new year bring.

Re: Read: How to Read a Book

Andreas Wiedow — Sun, 29 Dec 2013 03:42:51 -0000

@ No one is really teachable who does not freely exercise his power of independent judgment-

Since that in particular caught your and my attention I'd love you to expand your thoughts on this in a separate blog ?

Re: Read: The God Delusion

Roy Adger — Tue, 02 Apr 2013 00:02:37 -0000

My belief is that science is around to prove the existence of God to those who do not believe in God. Why is it that scientist search for the Ark, or how can they explain the missing of time. Yes, scientist cannot account for the time that the Bible describing the going back of the Sun. Scientist believe in the big theory as they stare further back in time, but they cannot explain how that big bang came about out of nothing. The more the scientist prove about the creation of man, the more they prove the Bible. Scientist already proved the creation of the earth as it cooled, but where did the water come from. How can scinetist explain how the human body is formed from a single cell to split and go into different directions and forming even the small blood capularies. I love scientist, the art of science is so fascinanting. I look at scientist helping us all learn more about the Creation Story, In the Beginning....Scientist is suppose to have open minds, why not keep their minds open to God, or are they in fear of being wrong?? Do you believe you are seperate from your body? Do you believe you are a spirit? Do you believe in spirits? Do scientist deal with the spiritual world? Ok, what wakes you up in the morning, if you say an alarm clock, take it to a cementary and see how many get up when it goes off.

Re: Read: The God Delusion

Philip Ronestone — Mon, 01 Apr 2013 21:57:47 -0000

I disagree in the premise upon which the God Delusion is written.

Re: Read: The God Delusion

Dennis A. V. Dittrich — Sun, 31 Mar 2013 17:22:57 -0000

I completely agree with you, Harold.

Re: Read: The God Delusion

Harold Gardner — Sun, 31 Mar 2013 17:15:05 -0000

There are a number of better critiques of God and religion than Dawkins. I think the diatribe intrigued him more than careful reasoning. That said, I have found it is bad science and bad religion that cause the trouble and not just in the mixing.

Re: Read: The God Delusion

Dennis A. V. Dittrich — Sun, 31 Mar 2013 16:29:42 -0000

So you think The God Delusion is well written and is equal to The Selfish Gene with respect to its didactic and adherence to good scientific practice?

Re: Read: The God Delusion

Dennis A. V. Dittrich — Sun, 31 Mar 2013 16:24:10 -0000

One problem is that those who believe in a particular personal god often force their offspring to the same belief system. As a result of the exclusive validity claim, quite often they also want to force others to adhere to their beliefs, or at least dominate them what may result in violent conflicts... There are plenty of ways how any particular religion may cause and prolong physical, mental, or economic harm.

Re: Read: The God Delusion

Philip Ronestone — Sun, 31 Mar 2013 16:23:49 -0000

Disagree.

Re: Read: The God Delusion

Sui Sui — Sun, 31 Mar 2013 15:58:57 -0000

Hmmm.., what the point to discuss about existence of God? Those, who wish - let them believe and those, who don't - let them be as well :) We should accept Golden Rule as universal for coexistence in harmony.

Re: Read: The God Delusion

Liz — Sun, 31 Mar 2013 15:56:55 -0000

Happy Easter! ; )