Imitation=Compliment, Plagiarism Something Else

[MJA]

Thanks Bottomlamder,

I find your restating the words I have written quite complementary, even though you combine them with negativity, it is still appreciated.
Perhaps your disfavor of the truth, or is it equality, is only a natural effect or resistance to change. Do you have any equality in your life, in yourself? How would you measure the quality of your life Bottomlander? If you wish to raise the quality of your life as well as the quality of everything around you, know this: Quality is synonymous with equality. To have a quality life, one must live equally with not just one's neighbors, but equally with all things, with nature itself.

The truth not theory of everything is the wisdom and practice of that truth.

As far as the value of theory versus the value of truth as per your concern, theories are questionable, were as truth has no doubt.

Thanks again, and hope I helped,

=
MJA

PS: Plagiarism? I think it was Shakespeare who said: "Words can never be owned, only barrowed or shared," I concur!

[Profpat]

Somewhere between theory and truth you lost PERSON.

[bottomlander]

Thanks Bottomlamder,

Perhaps your disfavor of the truth, or is it equality, is only a natural effect or resistance to change.

Dear MJA,

Skillfully, you put the word "Perhaps" before "your disfavor of the truth/equality."
Still, your indication is baseless. The actual situation is that I respect truth and equality.
That is why I disfavor your misinterpretation on truth and equality.

Please read some basic books on Critical Thinking.
Then, open-mindedly re-think upon your over-simplification, over-generalization and magic empty words.
Every mature/helpful theory is at least well fit to Critical Thinking.

It seems that you just like to win, win, and win, seldom re-think about your basis of reasoning.
Actually, you showed too little reasoning, just self-interpreted magic empty words cover other self-interpreted magic empty words. Or else, cite and switch the meaning/application of some wisdoms to support you. e.g.:

PS: Plagiarism? I think it was Shakespeare who said: "Words can never be owned, only borrowed or shared," I concur!

You switched the application field of this quoted sentence. It is very clear that it apply to Words. Everyone agrees that Words/Phases can never be owned, just like single words in dictionaries can be used freely. But you cannot overgeneralize and switch that for Copyrighted intellectual works.

For a breakthrough idea, people will find that is good/helpful to human.
Still, if you want to take use of it, it has the necessity, responsibility and morality to cite the source.
It is not that because you concur that Plagiarism is nothing serious, then people can be exempted from copyright or patent practises.
We have to respect the intellect products of others. People cannot say that an intellectual work is helpful, then it can be shared (without permission from the person who first worked it out.)

Best Regards. Bottomlander

[RascalPuff]

Dear MJA:
The definition of 'iconoclast' includes:
"One who attacks cherished beliefs or institutions."

Of course, words - of themselves - are not owned by anyone, neither is it apparent that many people think otherwise; with the notably emerged exception of your exemplary self.

It is the sovereign arrangement of words that is at issue here, not any given individual word shuffle of itself. This is a statement of the obvious - something you've proved a penchant to overlook. Your proffered 'misunderstanding' on this note is known by several words, one of which is 'iconoclasm', the other of which is known as 'transposition of contexts' (as bottomlander and Prof have explained to you, in their own words...).

Copyright, for example, among other things, is a form of institution, in this case, namely, the law(s) you cast aside with your - context transposited - words.

There are even gradations of disregard for copyright, one is 'infringement', which means (in your Shakespeare innovated words) 'borrowing or sharing'. 'Infringement' is when the name of the author of a given arrangement of words, is provided, but without the (living author, or active publisher's, permission).
In the orbits of literature, infringement is generally considered a lesser, more forgivable - generally ignored; sometimes complimentary - trespass...

'Plagiarism', on the other hand, is the placement of a name other than that of the original author on a given work. Comparable to producing currency that does not originate from a U.S. mint, or other qualified institution.

Were you to write:
"To be, or not to be, that is the question. Whether it be nobler to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, or take up arms against them...", etceteras...

And then append your name to that statement, as though you - instead of Shakespeare - were the author of it, then you would be guilty of plagiarism.
(Not to be confused with 'public domain', as it often mistakenly is - that is altogether another discussion...)

Plagiarism is tantamount to a particularly mean form of theft, an atrocious impersonation for which their is no excuse or redemptive rationalisation in your - what appears to be characteristic - retreat from, and attack upon, reason, morality and law. Your smug assault upon sacrosanct language, and words...

Kindly refer "10 Big Myths About Copyright Explained", by Brad Templeton
http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html

Regards,
-RP

[RascalPuff]

Double entry.

[RascalPuff]

Kindly refer "10 Big Myths About Copyright Explained", by Brad Templeton
http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html

[RascalPuff]

Enter "public domain" in Google, for further comparative research in this altercation.

Best regards,
- RP

[MJA]

Dear RP,

Sorry you are so troubled by the law.
I understand the issues and would never make light of others troubles.
I have seen legal issues myself and know from experience that the only person who wins in such cases is the attorney.
My point of comment was only my belief that freedom of speech is the essence of Democracy. That freedom, is the essence of TOE.
And freedom, was my only point.

Have an equal day,
MJA

PS: I guess the definition of "iconoclast" would inlude me!
Never been called one a them before.

[RascalPuff]

Dear RP,

Sorry you are so troubled by the law.
I understand the issues and would never make light of others troubles.
I have seen legal issues myself and know from experience that the only person who wins in such cases is the attorney.
My point of comment was only my belief that freedom of speech is the essence of Democracy. That freedom, is the essence of TOE.
And freedom, was my only point.

Have an equal day,
MJA

PS: I guess the definition of "iconoclast" would inlude me!
Never been called one a them before.

Dear MJA:

Duly noted that you've side-stepped the poignant issue of morality and responsibility, altogether.

Plagiarism is not merely an issue of the law, it is also one of freedom - from theft and the mock victories or losses of real or imagined attorneys.

Reprise: There's no better court than the one the self appointed opposition has inextricably placed itself in, here.

(To emulate your vernacular: Aversion often equals evasion, and that is the truth...)

You seem an avid student of Richard Bandler's neurolinguistic programming and behavior modification techniques.

Your syntax and style connote the idiosyncrisys of a word-salad tossing chatbot.

Transceiving with you is a real confirmation of obscurely familiar education.

Your operant conditions are apparently prepared to pee into the undaunted winds of change, indefinitely.

Enjoy yourself amidst the tides of evidence that speak for themselves

Ciao.

Regards,
- RP

[N0B0DY]

RP,

If you have written a book on your work and it has been registered in the appropriate forums with you as the author, what more can be said about it? I don't think people are stupid enough to give credit to another person when it is so easy to find out who said what first.

Is all this about Parquette trying to sell your work or did he submit it to a physics journal with him as the author?

You don't seem to be the type after a nobel prize or money, but only to contribute to the scientific community.