Mister Scratch wrote:He should be. His behavior---the Quinn gossip; his l-skinny antics; his condescension and ill-treatment of people in pain; his FARMS writings; his equivocation and hypocrisy regarding Mopologetic financing---doesn't speak very well of him at all. I really think he ought to apologize, and express some guilt and regret over these things.
Well, there is a big difference between being condemned and needing to apologize. I'll be quite frank and say that Dr. Peterson has done a few things that raised my eyebrows. I would not have done them. At the same time, I do not think he is an evil person. The regular characterization of him, his friends, and his organization as sinister is a distortion. I think it fair to say that he has erred in his treatment of some people and in his handling of some situations. He certainly has caused some people pain.
As for the "Mopologetic financing" issue, I simply don't find it that disconcerting. Mormonism is an unusual religion, and it is altogether understandable that it will defend itself and craft its image in such a way as to stave off criticism and derision. And when I say unusual, I do not mean 'beyond the pale,' but likely to attract negative attention. I think Scientology is troubling and disturbing (although I really like Beck), whereas Mormonism these days is, well, quirky and probably not for certain kinds of people... like you and me.
Mister Scratch wrote:Where is the "distortion"? Nothing I have said about him is wrong or false. I also don't think it's really accurate to say that I have focused "exclusively on the negative" regarding DCP. Did you read the posts on the recent thread in which he announced that translation project? Further, I have often praised DCP's writing skills. (He has never had a decent thing to say about me, however. Not one.)
But what, among his apologetic activities, is "positive", Trevor? What fundamental good has come of this?
You make a fine apologist for your own activities (don't we all?). Scratch, I think we both know that you can be perfectly accurate in everything you say and nevertheless distort the truth. You are obviously too sly a fellow to have me believe that you are some kind of rhetorical ingenue. If you have not been exclusively negative regarding DCP, it would probably still be fair to say that the limited praise you have offered has not really tempered your overall campaign to make him look like a world-class schmuck.
What among his Mopologetic activities is positive? I guess that is really a matter of perspective, and I am a lot less likely to find the positive than those who believe in Mormonism. Have you read all of his editor's essays in the FROB? I think there is some worthwhile stuff in there, and he is a good writer. What fundamental good has come of this? Very few people devote their careers to promoting fundamental goods. Why should I expect Dr. Peterson's Mopologetic activities to pass my fundamental good test? If he does not pass it, should he be pilloried?
