Islam versus Europe

6 comments:

EH said...

It appears you stretch the definition of "literate"; I quote the *first paragraph* of the THE letter:

'As a group of professional historians, academics and graduate students'...it would seem to me that MA candidates, PhD candidates, and DPhil candidates would fit into *at least* the last of those categories.

If we're talking the definition of "academic", the OED (to which you probably don't have access, being a fictional character, an' all) defines it in this way:

'2.
a. A member of a college or university; a collegian. Now spec. a senior member of a university; a member of the academic staff of a university or college; also loosely, an academically-gifted person.'

I am a member of a university. I teach at a university, for which I am paid. Given my ability to make it to a PhD, let's modestly assume I am 'loosely, an academically-gifted person'. Hmmmm. 75% constitutes nearly breaking a definition? I think your fictional status and inability to even read the first *two* sentences of a letter completely invalidate any semblance at intelligent criticism you think you may have rendered. And what are your credentials to even define who does and does not constitute a member of the academy?

Finally, when attempting to "own" historians with references to supposedly relevant quotations, citations are expected. Psst: Wikipedia doesn't count.

27 August 2011 23:36

Cheradenine Zakalwe said...

Is that you Elizabeth?

"Elizabeth Hutchin, PhD candidate, University of St Andrews"

The 102 signers of this letter were described as "academics" in the news reports and, even more erroneously, as "historians".

The clue is in the "Now spec." part of the definition. A student is not normally now considered an "academic". Even one of the OED's quotes establishes that:
"[1894 Univ. Chicago Weekly 4 Oct. 4/1 One student, a member of the graduate school,‥was heard one day soliciting an ‘Academic’ to set him right on the question of credits.]"

The 102 signers of the letter ought to reflect solemnly on another part of the OED's definition:

"academic freedom, the freedom of a teacher to state his opinions openly without censorship, or without the fear of losing his position, etc."

28 August 2011 00:51

EH said...

The signatories of this letter identified themselves accurately. If you take issue with how they have been described by third parties, then take it up with those publications...much like those 102 people did with the BBC.

Repeatedly using someone else's name and criticising her/his status whilst hiding behind a pseudonym taken from a science fiction novel is just cowardly. I repeat: what are your credentials for determining these things? Who are you?

To say "not normally now" whilst citing an example from 1894 is just laughable.

Finally, you again reinforce the fact that you failed to read or comprehend the letter.

28 August 2011 15:26

Cheradenine Zakalwe said...

My credentials don't matter, dear. Arguments stand or fall by their own merits. Since you purport to be an academic, you're no doubt familiar with the concept of "argumentum ad hominem".

While you're here, perhaps you'd like to share your insights on the relationship between the good ladies of Castile and their Muslim "sisters" before and after the glorious Reconquista was complete. Did they share make-up tips?

28 August 2011 16:36

EH said...

Oh, I see! You're not only a racist, you're also sexist, condescending, and make attempts at intimidating through internet stalking.

You have no argument. Every time you write something, you hide behind "arguments" which attempt to silence and intimidate, as well as your anonymity.

Fortunately, the end result is really quite funny, as stating that "credentials don't matter" invalidates your criticism of these signatories for being "D-graders" [sic]. Criticising their self-identification which you then attribute to a third party? A hoot! Trying to mock or scare someone with information about her work whilst at the same time asserting that for most of these people, when Googled "the only thing that comes up is this Starkey letter"? Oh my, stop already with the jokes. I didn't realise this website was satirical, a British internet version of "The Colbert Show", if you will. Bravo!

28 August 2011 17:58

Cheradenine Zakalwe said...

The letter specifically raised the issue of Starkey's credentials for talking about issues of class and race. I myself think his credentials were not relevant. His opinion and arguments stand or fall by their own merits.

The letter was also explicitly premised on the credentials of its signatories, "As a group of professional historians, academics and graduate students...". This invites and legitimates public discussion of those credentials.

It's ironic that you raise the question of stalking, given that you have repeatedly asked me to identify myself for no obvious reason. It's doubly ironic that you bizarrely accuse me of attempting to "silence and intimidate" when this is exactly what you and your fellow signatories do in your published letter.

Presumably you would like to extend your McCarthyite stalking activities to me as well as David Starkey. And you must also have googled my name, unless you happen to be an Iain Banks fan.

As for the mention of your research, I wasn't trying to scare you, dear. I am genuinely interested. I'm reading Jane Gerber's book about the Jews in Spain now. Post your thesis on the internet when it's ready and I will read it.

28 August 2011 18:48