Rachel gave me permission to repost this:

Speaking as an actual academic,^* this review does not merely devastate Douglas Wilson’s claim to scholarly credibility; it annihilates it. The level of plagiarism here is egregious. A single one — any one — of these occurrences in a published book or article would be sufficient to ruin the reputation of a legitimate career scholar. Heck, any college freshman should know better. No professor who saw this kind of dishonesty in student work would accept the excuse that this was accidental or that they didn’t know it was wrong.

Adding insult to injury is the fact that many of these plagiarisms are quotes taken from online sources including none other than Wikipedia. This means that you can quite literally get more reliable information from Wikipedia than you can from the book Mr. Wilson edited. In at least one case, the editors even introduced a spelling error (“Ninevah”) into their plagiarized quote!

Faced with this evidence, the Christian Classical Education movement as a whole either has to immediately dissociate itself from Mr. Wilson and his colleagues, or concede that they have less regard for intellectual standards than the administrators at any community college in the nation.

I wonder, how many more of Mr. Wilson’s logorrheic books contain plagiarism? This pattern can no longer be deflected as coincidence.

---

^* A current graduate assistant, but in order to get my lowly job you need more education than Mr. Wilson has. That should tell you something, too.Eric