Dan Peterson vs. Robert Spencer
Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:08 pm
A few days ago Dan took everyone by surprise and engaged Robert Spencer in a radio debate. Spencer is the author of numerous books on Islam, his recent being "Truth about Muhammad, the Founder of the World's Most Intolerant Religion."
Dan Peterson wrote me off years ago for saying Islam was the most intolerant religion. He refused to discuss anything about Islam with me. Yet here he is discussing it with Spencer. Oddly enough, Spencer says the discussion went smoothly because it seemed Dan agreed with just about everything he said. Over at MAD Dan said he wished he had said different things and clarified his positions better. He also said, strangely enough, that he had no idea that it was supposed to be a "debate."
In any event, I emailed Spencer and asked him if he would be interested in picking up where they left off in an online debate of written format. He said he would love to, and that he would pitch it to frontpagemagazine.com. I asked Dan if he would be OK with it and it seems he is declining.
Why?
I don't get it. First he said “As always, there are points one wishes one had made, places where one wishes one had been clearer and more eloquent, and directions in which one wishes that the conversation had gone. Still, on the whole, it wasn't a bad discussion.” Well, now he has the opportunity. So why not do it?
Dan says he doesn't particularly like debates because it rewards glibness, so he will stick to reviewing Spencer's book in the FROB. This makes no sense to me. In my experience, nothing rewards glibness more than a book review, where someone is given a podium to speak and nobody can respond. He said he wouldn't debate McCue because he didn't like the man, but now he says he doesn't like debates. So why does he do debates at all then?
I think this would be a great opportunity for us to find out where Dan stands on certain controversial issues, and understand his logic for why he believes what he does. It is a golden opportunity in my opinion. I hope he changes his mind and takes it.
http://www.kevingraham.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=283
Dan Peterson wrote me off years ago for saying Islam was the most intolerant religion. He refused to discuss anything about Islam with me. Yet here he is discussing it with Spencer. Oddly enough, Spencer says the discussion went smoothly because it seemed Dan agreed with just about everything he said. Over at MAD Dan said he wished he had said different things and clarified his positions better. He also said, strangely enough, that he had no idea that it was supposed to be a "debate."
In any event, I emailed Spencer and asked him if he would be interested in picking up where they left off in an online debate of written format. He said he would love to, and that he would pitch it to frontpagemagazine.com. I asked Dan if he would be OK with it and it seems he is declining.
Why?
I don't get it. First he said “As always, there are points one wishes one had made, places where one wishes one had been clearer and more eloquent, and directions in which one wishes that the conversation had gone. Still, on the whole, it wasn't a bad discussion.” Well, now he has the opportunity. So why not do it?
Dan says he doesn't particularly like debates because it rewards glibness, so he will stick to reviewing Spencer's book in the FROB. This makes no sense to me. In my experience, nothing rewards glibness more than a book review, where someone is given a podium to speak and nobody can respond. He said he wouldn't debate McCue because he didn't like the man, but now he says he doesn't like debates. So why does he do debates at all then?
I think this would be a great opportunity for us to find out where Dan stands on certain controversial issues, and understand his logic for why he believes what he does. It is a golden opportunity in my opinion. I hope he changes his mind and takes it.
http://www.kevingraham.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=283