guy sajer wrote: ...what I am saying is that according to the single most important standard of judging academic output in today's academic climate--publishing in peer-reviewed academic journals--you've done squat for over two decades now, for reasons you refuse to share.
All your claims to scholarly greatness should have this asterix attached to them, and your praise chorus at MADD and in the Mormon apologetic community should be so informed, lest they plant their lips to your backside under false pretenses.
Is this another of your attempts at meaningless, throw-away humor?
I ask because I don't want my following comments and questions to be misconstrued ironically as me (who admittedly has never published in a peer-review journal) wanting to appear "more intelligent" than you. ;-)
Anyway, I would think that degrees and letters would be "the single most important standard of judging academic output in today's academic climate". After all, how many articles in peer-review journals are accompanied by public honors ceremonies? And, speaking of an asterix, how many articles warrant a title (such as Dr. or Phd.) attached to one's name? Now, while there are rigorous academic standards to be met in a peer-review article, aren't they considerably less extensive and cover a more narrow scope than post-graduate degrees or letters? If so, the why would you consider peer-review articles in journals to be a more important judge of academic output than degrees or letters?
Also, do you think the standard you just commended to Dr. Peterson should be applied to critics of the Church? In other words, do you demand that prior to their standing in judgement of the academics of LDS apologists and apologetics, the critics include an astrix deliniating their lack of degrees and scholastic attainments and their having not published in peer-review journals--particularly those journals that may directly relate to subjects under discussion?
Just curious.
Thanks, -Wade Englund-