Ending Generalizations?
To the editors:
On behalf of scientists and smart people everywhere, I congratulate you on your newly clarified policy of not publishing opinion pieces containing “unsupported generalizations” (“To Our Readers”, March 20). This will surely raise the intellectual tenor of the op-ed page, and probably save a lot of paper too. Rest assured, someone in the Harvard community is bound to conduct an “unsupported generalization” watch to help you in your quest. Thank goodness we have protesters to spur these much-needed editorial advances.
Critics might say this policy just begs all sorts of questions about not only “unsupported particulars” but also, for that matter, “supported generalizations.” After all, evidence really satisfies no one, especially when it’s offensive. But we say to them, hey, Rome wasn’t built in a day.
Read more in Opinion
Dollars for ServiceRecommended Articles
-
LettersCouncil Gay Marriage Bill Oversteps Bounds To the editors: We'd like to thank the Undergraduate Council for so graciously undertaking
-
LettersStyle of 'The Invasian' Needlessly Offensive To the editors: I will not completely disagree with Justin G. Fong's opinions (Magazine,
-
LettersStand for Free Speech To the editors: The Brown Daily Herald printed David Horowitz's provocative advertisement arguing against reparations for
-
The Year in ReviewDispense RU-486 on Campus Earlier this month, Harvard students learned that they can now receive the abortion drug RU-486 through
-
President of Revived Harvard Critic Expounds Views and Aims of the "Fourth Publication"Yes. The Critic again! It is traditional that a fourth publication appear occasionally at Harvard to rear its stalwart knob
-
English 6.Debate for April 9, 1891.Question: Resolved that the killing of the Italians in New Orleans was Justifiable. Brief for the
