A Closer Look at FARMS Review 19/1 (2007)

[_JustMe]

Having seen the polemics against the FARMS Review for worthless information, dutiful dullness, idiotic reasoning, and pure religious bias with no content except character assassination, I am seriously interested in seeing an analysis of the exchange between Michael S. Heiser and David Bokovoy, which I read earlier today while on lunch. Remember, the essence of character assassination is the pure lifeblood of this publication. Be sure and point it all out, especially from that character Bokovoy. And note how utterly trivial, unscholarly, worthless, and no insights whatsoever Heiser shows about Bokovoy, especially in that last rebuttal.

http://farms.BYU.edu/publications/revie ... m=1&id=643
http://farms.BYU.edu/publications/revie ... m=1&id=644
http://farms.BYU.edu/publications/revie ... m=1&id=645

[_Daniel Peterson]

I'm reliably informed, from Scartchworld, that the FARMS Review consists essentially of continuous character assassination and ad hominem viciousness, so it seems extremely likely that the Heiser and Bokovoy pieces are of the same defamatory nature.

There's no need to read them.

[_harmony]

I'm reliably informed, from Scartchworld, that the FARMS Review consists essentially of continuous character assassination and ad hominem viciousness, so it seems extremely likely that the Heiser and Bokovoy pieces are of the same defamatory nature.

There's no need to read them.

It's more likely that they are the exception that proves the rule.

[_Daniel Peterson]

It's more likely that they are the exception that proves the rule.

That would have to be determined by actually reading a substantial and representative sample of Review essays.

My sense, though, I being somewhat familiar with the contents of the Review, is that even that more moderate evaluation can't really be defended on the basis of empirical evidence.

Instead, it's a matter of faith.

But strict Scartchodoxy doesn't actually allow for exceptions. To the Scartchodox, as explained by His Malevolence himself, the Review is relentlessly horrible.

Perhaps, though, there can be a reformed Scartchodox faith that's at least a bit more in line with reality?