| I read the post you link. I will not give my opinion of it, except to say that I do not find it enlightening on the question of intensity of reaction. As for your post, I am sorry, I have mentioned and discussed some of Jewel's faults, trying, as I usually do, to be productive, rather than simply condemn. I also took the side against him, at first, when I was told he had renounced the religious affiliation as grounds. I also think I did a much better job than any of you in explaining what was wrong with his use of the statistics, and in explaining what was wrong with asserting philosophical justification. But if, as he presented it to me, the issue turns on religion as the source of conscience- formation, even after renouncing dogmatic adherence, I have to say that he has a good point. I expressed some reservations (I said I wanted to think about it further), but that I thought he was onto something. If you had any sense, you would review my discussion with Jewel as a model for carrying on such discussions, instead of trashing me for not jumping on the band wagon against him........ |
