LDS "world famous scholar" publishes book

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_Levi
_Emeritus
Posts: 23
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 9:28 pm

Post by _Levi »

Bond...James Bond wrote:
Levi wrote:Unless they are peer-reviewed, they are suspect and probably worthless, in my view.


Well there goes all of Kerry Shirts' hard work down the crapper.


Whoever that is. I think the presumption that any material passing as scholarly which is not peer-reviewed is worthless. Which includes most everything you say on this Board. But, it is only a presumption and can be rebutted, I assume, with good rhetoric and cites.

Levi Rausch
_Levi
_Emeritus
Posts: 23
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 9:28 pm

Post by _Levi »

Pipes is a worthless doctrinaire. See the Slate article about him at http://www.slate.com/id/2086844/. Christopher Hitchens calls him "sophomoric." Mr. Dart, your level of sophistication on the Muslim question is what I would call, well, at the veneer level.

Muslims are as capable as any other peoples of democratic government. That isn't saying much.

Religion, and not just fundamentalism as Prof. Sajer maintains, is antithetical to democracy. Religion is the problem, Christianity is the problem, just as much as Islam is the problem. Witness the state-sponsored religions in most European countries for centuries. That's not true democracy.

But your brand of hyperbole spits forth hate upon a particular group of worshippers in the world. May God, if there is one, have mercy on your hard Mormon heart.

Levi Rausch
_MAsh
_Emeritus
Posts: 107
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:03 am

Post by _MAsh »

Tal Bachman wrote:
If you're right about Peterson's standing, you should be able to totally embarrass me. What glory would be yours! Embarrassing the evil Tal Bachman! Go ahead and do it, Ray. Pick ten TOP ISLAMIC SCHOLARS AROUND THE WORLD - scan the directories of Oxford and Cambridge, Columbia, ANU perhaps, Michigan, UCLA, wherever they have Near or Middle Eastern Studies programs at top flight universities, and then email as many professors as you want and ask them if they have ever heard of the "Islamist" (which is what Peterson calls himself) Daniel C. Peterson, and what their professional opinion of his research is.

DO IT. Show the world your cojones, Ray. Show the world what a puny, dishonest wretch I am, and how right you are! Show us that you yourself are not a fraud.

If you really believe what you are saying, you should have no hesitation whatsoever.


In advance I'd like to apologize for what is probably going to be a drive-by posting. I work too many hours & have too many commitments at home to do much posting this days (anyone who knows me on the MA&D board or any other email lists, knows that I post infrequently). I do, however, have opportunities to lurk. Some time back I remember reading Tal's comments on RFM that Dan Peterson was unknown among Islamic scholars. One day, out of curiousity, I sent an email to Dr. Hossein Ziai (professor of Islamic and Iranian Studies at UCLA [see his bio here: http://www.nelc.ucla.edu/Faculty/Ziai.htm]). I asked him if he knew Dr. Daniel Peterson of BYU & if so, what he thought of him. (I mentioned that I did not personally know-- and I haven't read-- any of Dr. Peterson's Islamic research, but that, instead, I was simply familiar with Dr. Peterson's writings on LDS issues.) Following, is his unedited reply:

Dear Mr. Ash,
Thank you. Dr. Peterson is a fine scholar of Islam. He has played a
very important, leadership role in helping to establish the Middle
East Text Initiative (METI) at BYU. His work as Managing Editor of
the METI publications is superb. The publication series has made
lasting contribution to the scholarly activity on Islamic
intellectual traditions. This has provided a forum and a means of
allowing meaningful, non polemic, and non apologetic studies and
texts in Arabic and Persian philosophical and other intellectual
traditions to be published in a bilingual format and thus made
available to wider audiences. This is especially important as there
is need both within Islamic studies to encourage and indeed nurture
the role of reason and solidify rationality, and also to inform the
non specialist audiences that there is a place for reason in Islam
which we must recognize, solidify, and uphold. These are very complex
times and the more we devote studies to the rationalist traditions of
philosophy and science in Islam the more we may be able to combat
irrational and hate driven polemics and other propagandist work. Dr.
Daniel Peterson has indeed established himself as a well respected
scholar and publisher of much needed scholarly work in Islamic
studies in general, and of the philosophical tradition in particular.
I personally have a great deal of respect for Dr. Peterson's work.
Please share this with Dr. Peterson in and related to LDS studies you
are involved at BYU, or elsewhere.
Sincerely,
Hossein Ziai

Quite frankly, I don't have the time or desire to poll nine other Islamacists.

Mike
_dartagnan
_Emeritus
Posts: 2750
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 4:27 pm

Post by _dartagnan »

You already said I was posing as an anti-Islamic bigot. What did I say that you agree with? Inquiring minds want to know.


Is it too much to ask that you back up your statements with references?

You said you were quoting me. We are still waiting for the references. One has to wonder why you’re beating about the bush. Since you are the paragon of academic integrity, and unlike lesser individuals, know how to do real research and present it accurately, you should be proud to present your findings.

That one was one of your supporters.


And I disagree with it completely. I would never condone the use of nukes those places, so it was wrong for you to imply that I agreed with it.

But I see we’re getting somewhere again…

It turns out you weren’t quoting me after all; now you say you were quoting someone else.

Doesn’t this seem a tad disingenuous, since you claimed your posts were quotations from me?

"Levi" you said,

Muslims are as capable as any other peoples of democratic government.


Thanks for illustrating your failure to comprehend a thing I said. I agree with your statement above, but I never said anything about the “Muslim” capability. I spoke clearly about what a sharia based Islam disallows.
Last edited by Guest on Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:46 am, edited 2 times in total.
“All knowledge of reality starts from experience and ends in it...Propositions arrived at by purely logical means are completely empty as regards reality." - Albert Einstein
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Post by _harmony »

Levi wrote:
harmony wrote:You might want to get to know the participants on the board before you jump off the deep end. Dart's not exactly the quinessential ethnocentric LDS. Many of us aren't.

And what's wrong with internet sources? Are you saying anything on the internet is automatically suspect?


Unless they are peer-reviewed, they are suspect and probably worthless, in my view.

Are you saying that Mr. Dart is not a Mormon?


Mr Dart is a Mormon, but he's not a Mormon apologist, at least not when it comes to certain doctrines and some parts of the canon.

And if peer-review is that important to you, I suggest you lock horns with DCP. He seems to think it's immaterial.
_Levi
_Emeritus
Posts: 23
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 9:28 pm

Post by _Levi »

harmony wrote:
And if peer-review is that important to you, I suggest you lock horns with DCP. He seems to think it's immaterial.


I've never heard of peer reviewing being all that important for religious apologia. In those journals which I read or occasionally scan, I just don't see much peer reviewing going on beyond editing and cite-checking. Matters of faith and religious belief are not really subject to academic scrutiny. Those scholars who make it a professional pursuit are just dancing, because there is no objective criteria to adjudge their conclusions of faith.

But, when it comes to the garbage Mr. Dart spews, for him to rely upon Daniel Pipes as his authority is, well, laughable to those who know the issues. I don't think Pipes has much respect in academia.

Levi Rausch
_Pumplehoober
_Emeritus
Posts: 120
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2007 1:53 pm

Post by _Pumplehoober »

dartagnan wrote:Is it too much to ask that you back up your statements with references?

You said you were quoting me. We are still waiting for the references. One has to wonder why you're beating about the bush. Since you are the paragon of academic integrity, and unlike lesser individuals, know how to do real research and present it accurately, you should be proud to present your findings.


I have already done so once. Why not guess. Are you too afraid to look like the brainless bigot you really are? Do you want me to tell you that this dog won't hunt? (I notice you never challenged the comment that you were a proven liar. Since I can prove that one too, I suppose you do not want people knowing about it?!?!)

And I disagree with it completely. I would never condone the use of nukes those places, so it was wrong for you to imply that I agreed with it.

But I see we're getting somewhere again…

It turns out you weren't quoting me after all; now you say you were quoting someone else.

Doesn't this seem a tad disingenuous, since you claimed your posts were quotations from me?


You're talking about one of your supporters Kevin. What will you do without them to stroke your precious ego and tell you how well researched you are?

PS. I know he is one of your supporters since he said “I support Kevin in his criticisms of Islam.”

Who needs enemies when you have friends like these?
_Gazelam
_Emeritus
Posts: 5659
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:06 am

Post by _Gazelam »

Image
We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light. - Plato
_dartagnan
_Emeritus
Posts: 2750
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 4:27 pm

Post by _dartagnan »

Pipes is a worthless doctrinaire. See the Slate article about him at http://www.slate.com/id/2086844/. Christopher Hitchens calls him "sophomoric."


Let me get this straight. Everything is worthless crap unless it is peer-reviewed. Yet, you immediately abandon that principle by directing our attention to a sleazy article writen by a journalist hatchet man, who presumes to have a clue and the background to discredit Harvard trained Daniel Pipes on matters of his own expertise.

Gotcha!

For those interested, Pipes has responded to this ridiculous piece: http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/81
“All knowledge of reality starts from experience and ends in it...Propositions arrived at by purely logical means are completely empty as regards reality." - Albert Einstein
_Bond...James Bond
_Emeritus
Posts: 4627
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 4:49 am

Post by _Bond...James Bond »

Levi wrote:Whoever that is. I think the presumption that any material passing as scholarly which is not peer-reviewed is worthless. Which includes most everything you say on this Board. But, it is only a presumption and can be rebutted, I assume, with good rhetoric and cites.

Levi Rausch


Don't worry about it. Dart (and most of the other posters here) already know Kerry Shirts (a.k.a. The Backyard Professor) is a joke of a Mormon apologist.
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07
Post Reply