Brian Hauglid has a meltdown

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_dartagnan
_Emeritus
Posts: 2750
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 4:27 pm

Post by _dartagnan »

Juliann jumps into the discussion in a poor attempt to defend Hauglid's stupidity and to blame the demise of the pundits thread on Brent!

by the way, "irenic" immediately reminded me of how "apologetic" has become an insult. It makes perfect sense in a competitive academic arena but I guess you kind of have to be there. I apologize for continuing the off-topic stupid stuff but enough is enough Brent. Get this junk out of pundits, please so the rest of us can get something out of this.


This was her way of telling Brent that the reason he doesn't understand Hauglid's usage, is simply because he isn't a real scholar.

She is such a moron. Hauglid is the one who started to be an ass towards Chris.
“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
_Trevor
_Emeritus
Posts: 7213
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 6:28 pm

Post by _Trevor »

juliann wrote:by the way, "irenic" immediately reminded me of how "apologetic" has become an insult.


This is a fair point, I think, but regrettably juliann had to use it to indulge in another similar swipe--her implicit use of the term "amateur" as an insult. There are many non-professional scholars who have made great or at least respectable contributions in subjects usually reserved for academic interest. One of my teachers in graduate school was a man who had published numerous books and articles (all in highly respected venues) on topics of Greek scholarship, and yet the man is a banker. The man who cracked Linear B, the Bronze Age syllabic script of the Mycenaeans, was an amateur. Mommsen, the great pioneer of Roman Studies, was also a man of politics.

There is, however, a good reason why apologetics has a bad name. The fundamental aim of apologetics, where history is concerned, is to protect a presentist vision of the historical topic at hand. It is not about discovering what happened in the past. Apologists protect institutions that are trading on visions of the past that they hold to be the absolute truth. Any accommodation to new discoveries that challenge their vision of the past will be gradual and grudging. Apologists will fight against the evidence until they have no recourse but to give up a position that is not absolutely necessary to sustain the institution.

We might call the problem of apologetics a war of perspectives on what scholarship should mean. My ideal is that scholarship should be about discovering what we do not know or do not understand as clearly as we might. Apologetics, meaning nothing more than the art of defending, is fundamentally different. It is about protecting turf that has already been mapped out. Naturally, I do not think that this is the best posture for a scholar to take in that apologists are far more successful at thwarting progress than they are at making it.
“I was hooked from the start,” Snoop Dogg said. “We talked about the purpose of life, played Mousetrap, and ate brownies. The kids thought it was off the hook, for real.”
_Chap
_Emeritus
Posts: 14190
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 10:23 am

Post by _Chap »

Trevor wrote:
juliann wrote:by the way, "irenic" immediately reminded me of how "apologetic" has become an insult.


This is a fair point, I think ...


I think you are being too kind to someone who has shown over and over again that she is not a person who respects rules of civility and fairness, or even has much regard for reason itself.

She knows that Hauglid will look ignorant if he cannot show that there really is a pejorative use of 'irenic'.

She cannot help him there (largely because nobody ever does use the word on its own in a pejorative sense - it never conveys any sense like 'bad' or slipshod' etc.), so instead she comes up with an example of how another descriptive word. 'apologetic', has in her view become pejorative. The logical connection with Hauglid's case is almost non-existent, apart from the fact that in the context in which we are arguing the word always has the implied qualifier 'LDS' in front of it when it is used pejoratively.

I have almost never seen Juliann make a 'fair point', and I certainly don't think this was one of them.
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Post by _harmony »

Chap wrote:I have almost never seen Juliann make a 'fair point', and I certainly don't think this was one of them.


It's been so long since we had a true "Juliannism", I'd almost forgotten she existed. Truly, there are some advantages to being banned from MAD.
_dartagnan
_Emeritus
Posts: 2750
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 4:27 pm

Post by _dartagnan »

Brian just posted the following to Brent:

Good grief. What tripe!

Don't bother. Let's just publish our volumes and let the chips fall where they may.


I love it. Brian is scared to death to debate Brent on the matter at hand.
“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
_The Dude
_Emeritus
Posts: 2976
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:16 am

Post by _The Dude »

Trevor wrote:
juliann wrote:by the way, "irenic" immediately reminded me of how "apologetic" has become an insult.


This is a fair point, I think, but regrettably juliann had to use it to indulge in another similar swipe--her implicit use of the term "amateur" as an insult.


Will Schryver is an amateur. He hasn't even been to college, as Brian Hauglid is surely aware. Not that it matters to me, but it seems to be a very big deal to folks like Brian, Gee, and dear Juliann. How does Will get away with this in their company?
"And yet another little spot is smoothed out of the echo chamber wall..." Bond
_dartagnan
_Emeritus
Posts: 2750
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 4:27 pm

Post by _dartagnan »

Will Schryver is an amateur. He hasn't even been to college, as Brian Hauglid is surely aware. Not that it matters to me, but it seems to be a very big deal to folks like Brian, Gee, and dear Juliann. How does Will get away with this in their company?


That's what Juliann likes to say about Brent all the time, but I do not know if it is true. I wasn't aware that Will had never attended college. In today's age, that's pretty rare. I want to go back to school and get my doctorate but I have to get settled in somewhere first and then figure out which school. This back and forth from USA to Brazil is getting tiresome.

Anyway, Brent works for Microsoft as a programmer. I would suspect that landing that kind of job without college credentials would be difficult if not impossible. Will first said he was an "independant filmmaker" (he produced "The Circle Jerky Boys") and now he claims he is a professional software writer. I don't know what to believe anymore, but I don't even care really.

All I know is that he is completely clueless about computer networking and the KEP.
“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
_Dr. Shades
_Emeritus
Posts: 14117
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 9:07 pm

Post by _Dr. Shades »

William Schryver wrote:By the way, I for one am quite confident that most of you losers here in the Trailer Park are shameless buggerers. Else why your proclivity for the orgiastic circle jerks in which you all enthusiastically participate?


This board is like a Rorschach blot test. You see what you want to see.

That you look at this board and see "shameless buggerers" and "orgiastic circle jerks" says much more about the inner workings of your own mind than it does this board.
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"

--Louis Midgley
_Kevin Graham
_Emeritus
Posts: 13037
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 6:44 pm

Re: Brian Hauglid has a meltdown

Post by _Kevin Graham »

bump
_Droopy
_Emeritus
Posts: 9826
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 4:06 pm

Re: Brian Hauglid has a meltdown

Post by _Droopy »

You have no evidence to support that speculation.... other than your feelings the Book of Abraham is true and the reality that the source documents don't match.


And of course, they don't need to match Mr. Wizard, because all indications are we do not have the source documents. We know, you see, we don't have them because eyewitness accounts from the 19th century clearly describe them.

See how easy it is when you don't come to the issue with a preconceived agenda and the petty hubris of a seared conscience?


Try to enjoy the daylight.
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us

- President Ezra Taft Benson


I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.

- Thomas Sowell
Post Reply