FARMS Review 20/2

[Guest]

I think the Boyce piece on science is extremely interesting.

And I don't share the view that his response to Holy Quinn was lèse majesté, sacrilege, and blasphemy.

Nice strawman. Whose view are you referring to? Simply put, it was an unscholarly and misleading review.

Why do you have a marriage and family therapist write reviews of works outside his field?

[_Mister Scratch]

Well, I will have to wait for the online edition.

LOL. From what you write (e.g., "attack pieces," "Prof. Midgley's obsessed rant against EVs," etc.) you don't appear to have waited at all.

There nothing wrong with what I said, any more than there is anything wrong with making observations based on trailers for movies, or any other sort of "preview." In fact, given that I have 20 volumes of FARMS Review precedent to rely upon, I think my judgment is more than fair.

[_Daniel Peterson]

I think my judgment is more than fair.

Fairness is to your judgment as Maui is to the Mojave Desert.

[_GoodK]

Why do you have a marriage and family therapist write reviews of works outside his field?

Probably for the same reason he had Michael Jibson write a review of "The End of Faith" by Sam Harris.

What a god-awful review that was.

[_Daniel Peterson]

Why do you have a marriage and family therapist write reviews of works outside his field?

Perhaps you ought to read his essay. Just a thought.

Probably for the same reason he had Michael Jibson write a review of "The End of Faith" by Sam Harris.

What a god-awful review that was.

LOL. Apparently I lack proper piety, since I seem to have committed yet another apparent case of lèse majesté.

Good review.

http://farms.BYU.edu/publications/revie ... m=1&id=606

And, of course, since Sam Harris is (in addition to being a demigod) a grad student in neuroscience, it isn't immediately obvious that an M.D./Ph.D. psychiatrist is unqualified to comment upon what he writes.

[_Tom]

Why do you have a marriage and family therapist write reviews of works outside his field?

Perhaps you ought to read his essay. Just a thought.

You didn't answer the question.

[_Daniel Peterson]

You didn't answer the question.

A reading of the essay will answer the question.

[_Tom]

You didn't answer the question.

A reading of the essay will answer the question.

Again, non-responsive. Aside from the latest review, why did you have a marriage and family therapist review a work of Mormon history? Was a reputable historian such as Thomas Alexander unavailable?

[_Mister Scratch]

I think my judgment is more than fair.

Fairness is to your judgment as Maui is to the Mojave Desert.

You do know that portions of Maui are quite desert-like, right?

Also: why not answer Tom's question? Do you really imagine that any of us are the least bit impressed with your "go read this! This will actually answer a question that was directed at me!" ploy? It seems to me that Tom was asking a question directed at your judgment as an editor, and not a question about the text you linked.

It's unclear whether you linked the text because you misunderstood, "misrepresented," or misread the question, or whether you're being deliberately evasive. If I were you, I'd opt with the former and I'd try to do the decent thing and answer the question.

[_cinepro]

This is followed by a section on “Book of Mormon” made up entirely by an essay by Brant Gardner entitled “This Idea: The ‘This Land’ Series and the U.S.-Centric Reading of the Book of Mormon.”
.

Is this the "This Land" series he refers to?

True Book of Mormon Geography

On a related note, I had signed up to attend the SoCal Rodney Meldrum seminar next week, but just received word it was canceled for lack of interest.