Hit: a time to tear down | A Time to Build Up
Disagreement is what happens in scholarship. If disagreement were a barometer of truth, only those in power would ever be deemed correct.
This criterion lends itself to selective application, which I find rooted in the cult of the personality. To appeal to well-known scholars who disagree (while ignoring those who don’t) is one of the most basic logical fallacies: the argument from authority.
True scholarship will die in such an environment.
A vaguely related article that I found interesting:
http://www.technologyreview.com/web/21558/
“On Wikipedia, objective truth isn’t all that important, actually. What makes a fact or statement fit for inclusion is that it appeared in some other publication–ideally, one that is in English and is available free online.”
Hmmm…. yeah, that is a bit scary,