Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 53 (9179 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Happy Birthday: Theodoric
Post Volume: Total: 918,137 Year: 5,394/9,624 Month: 419/323 Week: 59/204 Day: 1/34 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Hello everyone, and my senior paper
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 30 of 70 (692838)
03-07-2013 8:47 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by KevinAthans
03-07-2013 11:22 AM


Hello, Kevin. It's good to have you here.
It will be interesting to see what your report turns up.

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by KevinAthans, posted 03-07-2013 11:22 AM KevinAthans has not replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 31 of 70 (692840)
03-07-2013 8:52 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by Dr Adequate
03-07-2013 3:22 PM


Nothing wrong with being well-rounded.
Some folks get that way by eating lots of pie.
Others choose to study history.

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-07-2013 3:22 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 32 of 70 (692842)
03-07-2013 9:37 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by KevinAthans
03-07-2013 2:39 PM


There is much about this topic you do not understand...If you do not like my view, fine. But your attitude towards me and the utter disregard for what I am saying is more similar to the dogmatic views of the creationists that will not even hear the other side of the argument.
Yes, Kevin; you're going to see a lot of that here, and elsewhere as wellfolks who are creationists but accept evolution; who, though they fall for whatever mainstream science has to say, lack critical thinking abilities.
They make no headway with what they do; they just replace one dogma with another and carry on their merry way.
But as you say, pay them no attention: history certainly won't.

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by KevinAthans, posted 03-07-2013 2:39 PM KevinAthans has not replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


(2)
Message 41 of 70 (692896)
03-08-2013 12:18 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by Theodoric
03-08-2013 8:45 AM


As I said before, if you can't defend your posts then don't post to a debate site.
That's nonsense. There are many reasons to post here that have nothing to do with some sociopathic desire to always prove the 'correctness' of one's ideas.
Is that what you are going to say to your professor when he examines your paper?
My guess is that the professor is already aware of the assignment and doesn't need to be convinced of the value of the questions Kevin is posing.
If you don't think his ideas matter, then don't read the paper.

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Theodoric, posted 03-08-2013 8:45 AM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by Theodoric, posted 03-08-2013 12:28 PM Jon has replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 45 of 70 (692905)
03-08-2013 12:45 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by Theodoric
03-08-2013 12:28 PM


What is nonsense is you and he thinking that people shouldn't be criticizing and pointing out flaws in his argument.
What argument are you pointing out a flaw in?
You assume a lot. I would think the professor would want the premise and paper to be defended. If not people could write any old bullshit and say well "lets agree to disagree".
What is the premise that hasn't been defended?

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Theodoric, posted 03-08-2013 12:28 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by Theodoric, posted 03-08-2013 2:27 PM Jon has seen this message but not replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 51 of 70 (692950)
03-08-2013 4:31 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by NoNukes
03-08-2013 3:03 PM


I find the hubris level in his posts quite high.
Kevin likes what he studies and thinks it's important. He's not the first person guilty of this, and it's no crime to cry about.
You don't think the things he studies are as important as some other things; he doesn't find the things you care about as important as the stuff he studies.
"Agree to disagree" is, quite honestly, the best way to handle such an utterly meaningless difference of opinion.

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by NoNukes, posted 03-08-2013 3:03 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by NoNukes, posted 03-08-2013 5:00 PM Jon has seen this message but not replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 52 of 70 (692951)
03-08-2013 4:50 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by Dr Adequate
03-08-2013 3:43 PM


Re: Theology
Well; Kevin's not trying to practice science with his paper.
Kevin is trying to resolve issues with claims about Darwin's religious convictions by analyzing the editions of his Origins. His project sounds very similar to the undertakings of biblical historians who attempt to reconstruct original versions of texts to reveal information about the people who wrote the documents and the people who later edited them.
In Kevin's case, however, the people who wrote the originals and the people who later edited them are one in the same, and his analysis will reveal changes in that person over time as he developed his theory, with a particular focus on the religious aspects of his character.
I find the project interesting precisely because it has nothing to do with practicing science, but is specifically about textual analysis. And on this I believe Kevin and I see things in common, in that we are more interested in these textual and historical matters than we are in the hard science itself. The hard science is good; but some people just have different interests and their study of the hard science is thus indirect.
Why is this a problem? I don't know. I'm okay with it. You seem to be rather okay with it. Others don't mind. But there are some folks here who are lashing out at Kevin at the mere mention of him holding interests in science that don't align with their own.
Those people just need to be ignored.
Edited by Jon, : No reason given.

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-08-2013 3:43 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by Theodoric, posted 03-08-2013 5:15 PM Jon has seen this message but not replied
 Message 55 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-08-2013 6:07 PM Jon has replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 56 of 70 (692960)
03-08-2013 6:28 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by Dr Adequate
03-08-2013 6:07 PM


Re: Theology
These are just opinions and value judgments that Kevin is throwing around.
They aren't for anyone to debate because opinions don't matter.

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-08-2013 6:07 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by onifre, posted 03-08-2013 7:33 PM Jon has seen this message but not replied
 Message 59 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-08-2013 7:35 PM Jon has replied
 Message 60 by Theodoric, posted 03-08-2013 7:40 PM Jon has replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 61 of 70 (692975)
03-08-2013 9:16 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by Dr Adequate
03-08-2013 7:35 PM


Re: Theology
I shall confine myself to explaining why they are factually inaccurate.
For obvious reasons, factual accuracy is not relevant to opinions.
Edited by Jon, : No reason given.
Edited by Jon, : No reason given.

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-08-2013 7:35 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 62 of 70 (692976)
03-08-2013 9:21 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by Theodoric
03-08-2013 7:40 PM


Re: Theology
Well since you seem to be in his brain and know his intentions, why did he boast to a discussion board if he did not want any feedback?
Seems like he wanted to introduce himself and talk about his paper.
He also let on a little about why he's writing the paper: he thinks the history of science is interesting, perhaps even more interesting and important than the science itself. But that is just his opinion, and although it is the apparent reason for his writing the paper, he has said nothing to suggest he plans on using this as some sort of argument in his report (where it would be completely out of place anyway).
I just don't know what's getting everyone so bent out of shape.
Can't a man have an opinion?
Edited by Jon, : No reason given.

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by Theodoric, posted 03-08-2013 7:40 PM Theodoric has not replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 69 of 70 (693244)
03-12-2013 10:42 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by Taq
03-12-2013 5:46 PM


What I would hope to see from your paper is specifics as to why studying the history of science is important.
But that's not the purpose of his paper; if it were, then that's what he'd be writing about.
But he hasn't set out to argue for the importance of the history of science as a discipline; he has set out to understand Charles Darwin based on his writings and the changes he made to those writings.

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by Taq, posted 03-12-2013 5:46 PM Taq has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024