… the Left is bound and determined to beat it to death while it lay in bed.
From Durham-in-Wonderland
This blog has often noted how—in the race/class/gender groupthink atmosphere that dominates many humanities and some social sciences departments—it is likely that the academy will become more extreme in the foreseeable future. Since department members control new hires, those likely to challenge the status quo can be screened out at the stage of the job description or, if the candidate somehow makes it past the screening committee, at the campus interview. [...]Duke’s History Department is marinated in the Group of 88’s race/class/gender-based philosophy. Ten of its members signed the Group’s statement, and an eleventh—Reeve Huston—attacked Duke students in his class in ways that clearly violated the provisions of the Faculty Handbook. So, perhaps, it should come as little surprise to see what passes for scholarly discourse among some of the graduate students that the Duke department trains.
One of those students, Sean Parrish, recently offered a glimpse into how he viewed the state of the field.
Non-academics rarely think of history scholars engaging in nuclear warfare, but then we are just expected to write out the tuition checks without question. It’s not that Douglas Campbell’s Classroom without Reason doesn’t already confirm suspicion that non-science/tech/business (ie “squishy”) areas of the university have moved from scholarship to political advocacy ….
Recently, I completed a required program of instruction that was intended to improve my teaching. Among the required readings were two particularly disturbing books presented as critical to our personal and professional development. The first, Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher, by Stephen D. Brookfield, stated that our job is “to increase the amount of love and justice in the world†and “change the world.â€[1] Brookfield described faculty with an “anti-collectivist orientation†as “obstructionist dinosaurs standing in the way of desirable innovation and reform†[...]. Brookfield advocates for what he calls a “critical pedagogy†(208), whose foundations he credits to Karl Marx, as “a means by which students are helped to break out of oppressive ways of thinking and acting that seem habitual but that have been imposed by the dominant culture†(209). Brookfield goes on to assert that education cannot be practiced in a capitalist economic system—implying that universities need a collectivist environment to function properly and that the foundation of the conspiracy is capitalism itself. Finally, he encourages faculty to take the role of “agent provocateur†and urges readers to develop “tactical astuteness and cunning†(41) instead of honesty and candor.
… but the eyeopener is Sean Parrish’s arrogant, vomitous response in the comment thread
Dear Mr. Doug Army Guy, [...]As an actual graduate student, studying at a university other Americans have actually heard of, I found much of your piece a little hard to believe based on my own experiences with some pretty left-wing professors and students. As I see it, the point of academia is to take note of the simplified caricatures society produces – whether by the media, a variety of counter-cultural knownothings, or crusty intellectual posers like yourself – and try to complicate them by pealing (sic) away their layers of obfuscation. If you haven’t figured it by now I have no intention of sticking to the rules of “reasoned debate†as you and the NAS describe them …
Parrish’s bag of flaming dog turds was so outlandish that National Association of Scholars president Peter Wood felt it worthy of bumping it to it’s own post so he could “peal” away at Parrish’s own boorishness.
Reason, we know, has its limits. It cannot, by itself, supply the facts that may be needed to judge among competing hypotheses. And some urgencies demand answers now that reason may only hope to give later. Reason is a tool, not a god, as some in the French Revolution misconceived it. But it is the characteristic and we think indispensable tool of scholars. Without it…well, without it, we may get a variety of things, but none that are likely to sustain a claim to serious intellectual attention and respect.Mr. Parrish evidently disagrees. So what does he teach us about the graduate student mind liberated from “paternalistic†reason? The reader might wish to compile his own list, but here’s mine:
(1) Snobbery. Mr. Parrish gets started with the modest declaration that, “As an actual graduate student, studying at a university other Americans have actually heard of…†Mr. Parrish is at Duke; Professor Campbell teaches at California State University at Chico. Once we dismiss reason, snobbery is as good an argument as anything else. ‘I attend a better known institution, therefore heed me.’
(2) Ad Hominem invective. This starts with Parrish’s salutation, “Dear Mr. Doug Army Guy,†and gets progressively worse throughout the letter. Who does Mr. Parrish think he is? He thinks he is someone entitled to treat with contempt people he disagrees with.
(3) Uncivil language and abusive assertions. One of the rules of reasoned discussion is that we avoid gratuitous characterizations. Mr. Parrish knows virtually nothing about Professor Campbell, but freed from the restrictions of reason, he invents his own elaborate
psycho-sexual fantasy and projects it on to Professor Campbell as:…an ancient fear among daddy-worshipping morons concerning the presence of effeminate ‘faggots’, ‘commies’, and women in positions of higher learning.
If we ask, “How does Mr. Parrish come by this privileged knowledge?†we can find the answer in his first paragraph. These are, he tells us, “insights.â€
(4) Just plain nastiness. Reason demands that we try to persuade people. Absent reason, the passions take over, and in this case, irritability seems to be in charge. I don’t have any idea what Mr. Parrish is like in person, but I would have advised him not to post this. If he intends, as he implies, to seek an academic career, search committees will, in exercising their due diligence, search the web and find his post. Perhaps some such committee will be deeply impressed with his dissertation, approve of his ideological stance, and otherwise think he is a strong candidate. But the committee will also have to evaluate him as a potential colleague. Reason isn’t blind. Is it really wise to present yourself as someone with this much disdain for those you consider to be your inferiors?
It should be noted that Parrish answers both Wood and Campbell in that comment thread, too, and while he may be a “scholar” of the Italian Renaissance he has never learned the first rule of holes.
It’s an interesting read for a quiet, Memorial Day afternoon … especially with high school graduations in the next couple of weeks and tuition checks to write for nascent college students.
Caveat Parentis
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 5:31 pm #
I’ve been arguing for years that the academy is done. Time to scrap the whole thing and start over.
Comment by Darleen on 5/25 @ 5:36 pm #
SBP
It looks like my youngest will get out of college with her mind fairly intact (she’s majoring in business – advertising and marketing so that has helped) but my stepson starts high school this fall and the best we can, I believe, is push him towards engineering.
GOTTA keep ‘em out of the squishy stuff.
Comment by newrouter on 5/25 @ 5:40 pm #
who hires the people who spend 4 yrs acquiring such “knowledge”? when does this ponzi scheme collapse?
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 5:41 pm #
I understand, Darleen.
It’s a shame that it has to be that way, though — a good background in the “squishy” stuff (history, literature, philosophy, the arts, psychology) is vital to producing competent voters.
Allow me to recommend this to the boys and girls in the viewing audience. :-)
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 5:42 pm #
Wake me up when they have to read “shocking” books like The Wealth of Nations, SFAG.
Or indeed any of the books at the link I just posted.
Comment by newrouter on 5/25 @ 5:43 pm #
no it is schocking to see so many people willing to so much money for this useless “information”.
Comment by gus on 5/25 @ 5:43 pm #
I just checked Duke off of my son’s future list. I checked Notre Dame off last week.
Comment by Darleen on 5/25 @ 5:44 pm #
meya, before posting a non-sequitor maybe you should read all of the links.
Comment by Darleen on 5/25 @ 5:48 pm #
SBP
Personnally, I love the “squishy” stuff. My grandfather loved history and I enjoyed sitting next to him as he wove it as a story for me.
Oh… his formal education ended with the 8th grade, but he could have easily given Parrish a run for his money. People of his generation loved and treasured learning for the KNOWLEDGE not the “power”.
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 5:56 pm #
Gus, you’re going to be doing a lot of checking off, I’m sorry to say. Virtually all universities are full of such nonsense nowadays.
However, it’s possible to get a decent education at almost any university *if* one is careful.
Twenty years ago I’d have said go for the one that had the best library, but now all of the classics are freely available online, and in-copyright works (even less-popular ones that aren’t PC) can be easily had from amazon.com and similar sources.
However, sdferr seems to think highly of St. John’s College (note: not the same as St. John’s University), and I’m willing to take his word for it. It might be worth a look.
Comment by Darleen on 5/25 @ 6:04 pm #
gus
May I offer some college advice?
Only you know the maturity level of your offspring. Unless they are really mature and also highly motivated to get into and stick with a four-year college, please talk ‘em into doing general ed classes at your local community college. First off, you won’t be paying over $10,000 for a year of partying. Second, all the GenEd at the cc level is exactly the same and transferable to 4 yr college and Third, many of these cc classes are taught by the same professors at the university level (when I went back to college half of my gen ed classes are Riverside CC also taught at UC Riverside). Also, at the cc level you will actually get a professor and not a 4th year student TA or Grad student teaching the freshman class.
#4 daughter was highly motivated to get to a 4 year college and she more than survived frosh year (we helped her move into the dorm and got to meet her roomate and several on her floor…of those we met, my daughter was the only one not to drop out at the end of freshman year).
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 6:10 pm #
There’s definitely no good reason to go to Enormous State University for lower-division courses. As Darleen says, you’ll often find better teaching at a community college.
One exception might be if the student were going into some field that requires uber-expensive laboratory equipment or some such. Few community colleges have petaflop computers or nuclear reactors. Even then it would be cheaper to take the non-major courses at a community college.
Here’s an overview of the St. John’s program.
Comment by John 3/16 (Carpenter) on 5/25 @ 6:20 pm #
Reason isn’t just sleeping … the Left is bound and determined to beat it to death while it lay in bed.
In other news, this just in: Reciting some magic words over a cracker literally causes it to transubstantiate it into the body of Jesus Christ. Closet cannibals rejoice.
Over to you, Darleen.
Do you ever wonder how much of the “liberal elite” is driven to that political position in self-defense, simply because they know exactly what people like you would do with science and reason, if you ever had the power to bury or burn them?
Comment by Colin Powell on 5/25 @ 6:24 pm #
Do you ever wonder how much of the “liberal elite†is driven to that political position in self-defense, simply because they know exactly what people like you would do with science and reason, if you ever had the power to bury or burn them?
They become irrational because they perceive irrationality elsewhere? Explain, please.
Comment by Darleen on 5/25 @ 6:25 pm #
what people like you would do with science and reason
You “reason” as well as Parrish. Where do you get your information on what “I” would do with power?
Please, recite/link quotes of mine to substantiate your bigoted screed.
Comment by dicentra on 5/25 @ 6:30 pm #
John, sweetie. We on the right aren’t terrified of nuclear power, irradiating food, “frankenfood,” or carbon dioxide. We do, however, know that you’re more likely to be harmed by the mercury in the swirly bulb than by James Hansen’s imaginary warming.
Do you ever wonder how much of the “liberal elite†is driven to that political position in self-defense, simply because they know exactly what people like you would do with science and reason, if you ever had the power to bury or burn them?
People like Darleen? Catholics? You mean the originators of the modern university? Those who declared that the universe is knowable because God is logical, and therefore you can know the mind of God through minute and thorough study of the cosmos?
Those people?
Comment by newrouter on 5/25 @ 6:31 pm #
newton was a believer so was einstein but i guess their science doesn’t count to proggs
Comment by gus on 5/25 @ 6:34 pm #
Reason is quite simple. It’s LOGIC.
Here is LITERALLY how it works.
If you believed in man made Global Warming.
If you believed AUTO EXHAUSTS were causing/contributing to this WARMING.
If you believed and had the power to enforce our NATIONS compliance with higher fuels standards….say 36 MPG.
Why would you purchase and drive a 8cyl 15 mpg Chrysler 300???
It’s not fugging rocket science.
Comment by gus on 5/25 @ 6:34 pm #
Reason is quite simple. It’s LOGIC.
Here is LITERALLY how it works.
If you believed in man made Global Warming.
If you believed AUTO EXHAUSTS were causing/contributing to this WARMING.
If you believed and had the power to enforce our NATIONS compliance with higher fuels standards….say 36 MPG.
Why would you purchase and drive a 8cyl 15 mpg Chrysler 300???
It’s not fugging rocket science.
Comment by dicentra on 5/25 @ 6:37 pm #
Furthermore, when was the last time that someone insisted that the doctrine of transubstantiation be taught as science?
Get up-to-date, John. Intelligent Design is the latest pseudo-science that the godbotherers are peddling. Your side is still trying to persuade the populace that a tiny amount of carbon dioxide has the forcing power sufficient to create an unprecedented positive-feedback loop.
And that petroleum floating on the ocean is The Worstest Evilest Thing Evar (except for the petroleum that seeps naturally from the seabed and floats to the top).
And that the people who run the Veterans Administration should be in charge of everyone’s health care.
Comment by Colin Powell on 5/25 @ 6:38 pm #
We all need to jettison these silly superstitions and surrender our wills to The Collective, cuz we all know how well it’s worked up to now. Scientifically!!
Comment by baldilocks on 5/25 @ 6:38 pm #
“We on the right aren’t terrified of nuclear power, irradiating food, ‘frankenfood,’ or carbon dioxide.”
This whole carbon dioxide business rests on the fact that many don’t know the difference between carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide. The Environmentalist Snake-handlers rely on this ignorance.
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 6:39 pm #
if you ever had the power to bury or burn them
Funny… I’m not seeing many religious folks on this list.
Quite a large number of leftists, though.
Comment by Darleen on 5/25 @ 6:40 pm #
People like Darleen? Catholics?
For the record (again), I’m not Catholic. Yes, I took RCIA and attended Mass for years (daughters baptised Catholics thru first communion). I was raised in the Presbyterian church, my paternal line is LDS, and I’ve also attended Temple and many a Passover seder with my Jewish friends. I haven’t belonged to any denomination in years.
All of which has never been in conflict with my interest in science, medicine, mathematics, law, parenting, etc. Why should it?
John (his/her current nom de troll) creates an especially fluffly straw man to distract.
Comment by happyfeet on 5/25 @ 6:40 pm #
Ron Hirschbein is a big girl I think. He wasted my time cause I read and re-read looking for his point and the big girl didn’t have a point. What I want is to hear what Mr. SEK thinks.
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 6:41 pm #
Is it Gordo again, Darleen?
Comment by dicentra on 5/25 @ 6:44 pm #
Well, yes, I did not know whether you were Catholic, Darleen. But the duud mentioned transubstantiation, which means Catholic, which means the originators of the modern university.
A spoiled American is that John troll. No concept of gratitude or history or humility.
Comment by dash rendar on 5/25 @ 6:47 pm #
Misread Focault and your ass will be on academic probation SO fast. Now let me continue, the eschaton is IMMINENT. Godammnit.
Comment by Jeffersonian on 5/25 @ 6:49 pm #
Let me reassure folks here that we engineers haven’t gotten smart enough yet to deconstruct all those “brilliant” “discoveries” and “inventions” by various and sundry dead white males. Accordingly, until those smart guys from the Humanities Department storm the faculty lounge and relieve us of the false consciousness that E=IR and F=ma are anything but tools of the oppressive patriarchy, your cars will start, your lights will turn on and your buildings won’t fall down.
That is all.
Comment by Jeffersonian on 5/25 @ 6:50 pm #
This whole carbon dioxide business rests on the fact that many don’t know the difference between carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide.
Oxygenist!!!
Comment by dash rendar on 5/25 @ 6:50 pm #
Either Watson or crick is now verbotten. I don’t recall which.
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 6:52 pm #
C’mon, we all know that the Catholics are just a buncha ignorant witch burners.
I mean, look at Mother Teresa and Father Damien (soon to be Saint Damien, I’m happy to see).
Not to mention utter scientific morons such as Gregor Mendel, Athanasius Kircher, and Georges Lemaître.
Comment by the Academy on 5/25 @ 6:52 pm #
Sweet.
Self-screening.
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 6:54 pm #
Watson, I think, dash.
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 6:54 pm #
Self-screening.
At least until the taxpayers get fed up with funding it.
Comment by The Monster on 5/25 @ 6:55 pm #
This should set off alarms:
First of all, it leaves unstated the criteria by which these unnamed other people “like you” are considered to be “like you”, and yet implies that those criteria provide sufficient information to prejudge what such people would do.
Try out this variation:
Now, to me, assigning an individual into a group, alleging behavioral proclivities of that group, and then imputing those same proclivities upon the individual so assigned, is called “prejudice”, or “bigotry”.
See also Joy(less) Behar on Senator Johnson’s stroke:
This stuff is right up there with The Protocols of the Elders of Zion in the sheer ballsy-ness of the Big Lie. Proggs repeat these stories to each other so often that they honestly believe “that party is capable of” any imaginable outrage; disproving any individual theory counts for naught, because it doesn’t change that they know in their hearts the Greater Truth is chock full of true truthiness, and anyone who can’t appreciate Greater Truths really doesn’t count anyway, because they’re clearly raaaacists.
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 6:57 pm #
Jeffersonian, you might want to look into Sandra Harding if you’re in the mood for a good belly laugh.
She once referred to Newton’s Principia Mathematica as “Newton’s rape manual”.
Comment by geoffb on 5/25 @ 6:57 pm #
I’ve heard nothing but good things about Hillsdale College. Tooting a Michigan horn. Click on the Imprimis link at the bottom of the page to get their monthly publication. It’s good.
Comment by The Monster on 5/25 @ 6:58 pm #
Or, for that matter, Dihidrogen Monoxide
Comment by Darleen on 5/25 @ 7:00 pm #
SBP
John has posted here as Clouseau (mostly) Steely Dan and Groucho. Being cute as John he listed an email as “dananddarleen@godbotherers.com”. But under Clouseau his has a blog spot under http://www.geoffreyfalk.com/index.html where we are treated to:
Nice.
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 7:00 pm #
The trolls are probably disappointed that no one has recommended Bob Jones University, Jerry Falwell’s Liberty University, or Oral Roberts University.
Comment by Jeffersonian on 5/25 @ 7:01 pm #
Jeffersonian, you might want to look into Sandra Harding if you’re in the mood for a good belly laugh.
She once referred to Newton’s Principia Mathematica as “Newton’s rape manualâ€.
QED!!!
And who else remembers this oldie but goodie that Jeff linked some time back?
Comment by newrouter on 5/25 @ 7:02 pm #
oh please how many ” car running in the garage” stories are there? you’re just a dioxide bigot. i think all oxides should be treated equally.
Comment by dash rendar on 5/25 @ 7:03 pm #
I think the disintegration of duke is bizzare in the sense that it goes unbenknownst to the the student body which is the craziest of all places and the womens all travel in voracious Versace packs what love…I well I guess it makes sense now.
Comment by baldilocks on 5/25 @ 7:03 pm #
Tee hee!
Comment by baldilocks on 5/25 @ 7:04 pm #
“Tee hee!”
That’s for #s 31 and 40.
Comment by dash rendar on 5/25 @ 7:06 pm #
But they have a nice museum on a hill at least.
Comment by Darleen on 5/25 @ 7:07 pm #
Tee hee!â€
That’s for #s 31 and 40.
I agree, Juliette, and “voracious Versace packs” earns another giggle from me.
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 7:07 pm #
John is this guy. He doesn’t much like you Christianists, and I’m a moron because I don’t take AGW as gospel. Like he does. (Scroll to May 20).
He did send me a copy of his book, Hip Like Me, though. For that I thank him.
Why he’s afraid to use his own name? No idea.
Comment by The Sanity Inspector on 5/25 @ 7:08 pm #
Like Thomas Sowell said, the one true thing about the ideas of the Left is that they do not work. So it’s no surprise to find those ideas clustered in institutions where ideas do not have to work, in order to survive.
Comment by JD on 5/25 @ 7:08 pm #
Why is it that so many trolls either will not or cannot keep from using sock-puppets, and displaying the overt bigotry that they claim to despise?
Comment by baldilocks on 5/25 @ 7:11 pm #
And 44.
Comment by the Academy on 5/25 @ 7:11 pm #
At least until the taxpayers get fed up with funding it.
Or they get broked.
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 7:12 pm #
Oh, it’s Mr. “supposedly studied physics and electrical engineering but doesn’t even have a bachelor’s degree” again.
Good Christ.
Comment by dash rendar on 5/25 @ 7:12 pm #
I think this fits in nicely with the duke lacrosse kerfuffle. A sport which I partook in at another school contemporaneously…not good times.
Comment by Jeffersonian on 5/25 @ 7:14 pm #
We call those kind “electricians,” SBP.
Comment by baldilocks on 5/25 @ 7:16 pm #
One thing that’s noticeable about anti-theists: they tend to believe in anything as long as said anything doesn’t have the dreaded “G” word attached to it. It’s as if God says “okay, I’m out. You can have all the crap–all the Chaos, since that’s what you want.”
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 7:17 pm #
You mean like self-proclaimed staunch Catholics Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry and Ted Kennedy?
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 7:18 pm #
Nah, Jeffersonian. Electricians know how to do useful work.
Here’s his work history.
Comment by baldilocks on 5/25 @ 7:20 pm #
I sent that Penn and Teller clip to my mom with the heading “Ban Dihydrogen Monoxide!” She’ll fall for it. She’s a very smart lady but she’s kind of blond sometimes even though she’s black.
Comment by Jeffersonian on 5/25 @ 7:22 pm #
Here’s his work history.
Geoff seems to be living up to what a rational person’s expectations for him would be, no?
Comment by Bob Reed on 5/25 @ 7:22 pm #
Unfortunately, this mindset has come to typify much of the academy, and although generally restricted to subjective, non fact-based subjects of study, this deceptive, by-any-means-necessary mindset has begun to invade the sciences and engineering too…
To wit; the kool aid drinking AGW cultists…
The really unfortunate part is all of the government and endowment money meant for actual eduational pursuit, advancement, research, or other discoveries that has been co-opted in the name of social justice…
As I mentioned the other day, a great many modern college level pre-civil war American history classes are essentially grievance inculcation symposia that focus almost myopically on the horrors of slavery, and how that institution was singley responsible for all of our modern prosperity (hence the righteousness of reparations). I just wonder how many masters theses have been ire-inducing treatises on the horrors of the middle passage..?
I wonder just how many “dumbed-down” graduate degrees have been handed out; in the name of fairness…
How does crap like Billy Ayers educational “theories” get legitimized by any academy..?
How do some of these whack-jobs get awarded diplomas..?
With many of these radicalized academics continuing on to carreers in the academy themselves, many
schoolingindoctrinating public education elementary and secondary school teachers, is it any wonder that our education system is as poorly performing as it is…Just a few observtions from an old school type…
I mean, I know that I’ve effectively confessed to my unconscious racist and sexist programming…
I DENOUNCE MYSELF!
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 7:23 pm #
More from “John” / geoff Falk, this time as Clousseau.
And this.
Seems geoff is a self-impressed atheist who calls anyone not sold on AGW to the extent that we believe it prudent to mortgage economic stability for a marginally cooler climate, a “moron.”
Yours truly being characterized as just such.
He hates anything with a religious taint, Mr Falk does — and is willing to diminish religious believers — but don’t you dare start pretending that the earth isn’t under dramatic assault by man and his egregious carbon footprint.
HERESY!
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 7:26 pm #
Geoff seems to be living up to what a rational person’s expectations for him would be, no?
I think it’s probably a Catholic conspiracy, Jeffersonian.
How does crap like Billy Ayers educational “theories†get legitimized by any academy..?
Alinsky tactics. If you haven’t read it, I highly recommend the lengthy analysis dicentra posted on the Pub some time ago.
Comment by psycho... on 5/25 @ 7:26 pm #
As an assembly line for barely distinguishable simpletons with attitude, academia succeeds amazingly. I mean, Meghan McCain graduated from as impressive a school as I did, and she’s illiterate. In italics.
A thing is what it is.
They “work” to cluster and to institutionalize. Amazingly.
Comment by Darleen on 5/25 @ 7:27 pm #
institution was singley responsible for all of our modern prosperity
huh? The South was (IIRC) much poorer than the North on just about all metrics. Slavery was a drag on the Southern economy.
uh oh… somewhere this post will be in Janet’s database and I see a reeducation camp in my future.
Comment by newrouter on 5/25 @ 7:28 pm #
mr. tesla was an electrician
Comment by newrouter on 5/25 @ 7:30 pm #
sortof like co2 and global whatever positive feedback loop
Comment by happyfeet on 5/25 @ 7:33 pm #
That Parrish one, he’s a poor writer inasmuch as when he writes, he does not do it very well. My favorite sentence so far is this one I think:
Comment by JD on 5/25 @ 7:35 pm #
John or whatevs he calls himself is just a run-of-the-mill bigot. And a simpleton, that prefers to let others think for itself, presumably out of fear of pulling a muscle. And it is as big of a lying Pelosi as meya and Sammy.
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 7:36 pm #
This graph is interesting (sorry if you’ve seen it before).
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 7:37 pm #
That’s pretty standard grad student speak, happy.
And don’t worry: Parrish is getting job offers as we speak. I’ve cited Professor Wood here several times. A search will reveal precisely why getting diced by one such as him is a badge of honor to two-bit humps like this Parrish kid.
I used to fuck guys like him in prison.
Comment by Bob Reed on 5/25 @ 7:38 pm #
Darlenn,
Aren’t you aware that it is now a matter of revisioninst historical fact that the entire prosperity of America is based upon the institution of slavery..?
That slave labor built our great nation..?
I can’t tell you how often I’ve been had this assertion made to me over the last 10 years…
It was especially popular in DC among the bureaucratic types and the GW/Georgetown U crowd…
It is funny though, I have only heard it a few times in New York…
Really…I kid you not…
Comment by newrouter on 5/25 @ 7:38 pm #
pot bellied dictator go BOOM. mahdi nut go BOOM.
Comment by newrouter on 5/25 @ 7:40 pm #
you did practice safe sex?
Comment by geoffb on 5/25 @ 7:41 pm #
I’d like to state for the record that geoffb is not Geoff Falk. He does recommend Protein Wisdom on his homepage so there is that that I agree with him on.
I spend the first 20 or so years of my life never encountering any living person with my first name. Now they seem to be everywhere. Just exactly when did Chaucer become a favorite of expectant moms?
Comment by Dash Rendar on 5/25 @ 7:42 pm #
“I used to fuck guys like him in prison.”
I think this is the nuance thing I keep hearing so much about.
Comment by Academouis XIV on 5/25 @ 7:42 pm #
l’Etwat c’est moi.
Comment by happyfeet on 5/25 @ 7:43 pm #
Why are these Parrishes and Hirschbeins such angry people do you think? Barack Obama is the most useless messiah EVER.
Comment by Jeffersonian on 5/25 @ 7:44 pm #
mr. tesla was an electrician
Nick didn’t need to finish skule.
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 7:45 pm #
More from Falk.
I sure hope the argumentation is stronger here than in his arguments objecting to my call for the use of ID as a teaching tool for distinguishing b/w the scientific method and metaphysics.
Because that argument displayed the kind of irrational fear of religion that is the mirror image of the kind of religious rapture it seems always expect to strike him. Like lightening.
Comment by Darleen on 5/25 @ 7:46 pm #
Aren’t you aware that it is now a matter of revisioninst historical fact that the entire prosperity of America is based upon the institution of slavery..?
Yeah, just like youngsters these days seem to think slavery originated in, and was solely the province, of Amerikkka (and that all slaves were from Africa).
My twin grandsons turn 7 in September and I’m already thinking about getting them to join the military out of high school and going to college later. Kind of a vaccination against Leftcult bullshit.
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 7:55 pm #
Falk has updated his top post to include the following:
As protein wisdom is my site, and there are many agnostics (like me) and atheists (like Allah and Charles Johnson and Nishi) who read here, I’m a bit confused why Mr Falk has decided that this is an anti-science site, Christianist site. Sure, Jesus was a Jew. But I don’t hang with Jon Stewart, either.
I’ve stated my position on abortion here (reluctantly pro-choice; or pro-choice with restrictions); I’m most certainly not anti-science; and my psychological infant-ness is tied up almost entirely with obsession with nice titties.
For some reason, people like this guy — who seems to fancy himself some sort of scholar of the highest order — have a difficult time dealing with opinions different from his own.
For instance, had he emailed me his May 20 post, I would have linked it and allowed people to discuss his “critique.” But that’s not really his style. He’d rather not be challenged directly.
Leads to a lot of self-published tomes, such a mindset does.
I may eventually publish a couple of books myself, but it won’t be like I haven’t vetted the intentionalism stuff already by posting it on a significantly trafficked blog and leaving it open to commentary.
Part of my fear of differing opinions, you see.
Comment by happyfeet on 5/25 @ 7:55 pm #
I think the going to college later thing is very very wise. Military or just whatever really. I think that’s a big part of the answer to the question of how best to pimp-slap academia.
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 7:55 pm #
I’m not sure I’d want to see most of those gurus naked.
Just sayin’.
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 7:56 pm #
l’Etwat c’est moi.
Okay, that’s funny.
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 7:57 pm #
I’ll bet there are companies just lining up to bring Geoff into their organizations. Why wouldn’t you? And if that doesn’t work out, he can always write books.
Oh. I’m sure that will catch on once the stupid fucking assholes that buy books realize that they’re going to keep being ignorant morons until they give themselves the gift of Mr. Falk’s insightful analysis.
Comment by geoffb on 5/25 @ 7:57 pm #
The miraculous effects of slavery upon an economic system were documented by Solzhenitsyn and others. They can be seen even today in such enlightened places as North Korea with it’s atomic magic, and Cuba with it’s amazing and economical medical system.
State slavery, so much more caring and complete than the old private kind. Coming soon to a country you used to know and still love.
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 7:58 pm #
Personally I prefer the new low-cal communion wafers — “I Can’t Believe It’s Not Jesus”.
(shoutout to whoever thought that one up)
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 8:00 pm #
Wait, I think he’s going to turn that update to his top post into another book.
The revised version:
Funny. I’m not religious at all. I just don’t feel the need to attack people who are.
Well, unless they worship trees and dirt.
Because that’s just, like, fucked.
Comment by Darleen on 5/25 @ 8:00 pm #
away from my science
Oh my, Falk has his own Science(tm).
I think Mike Myers will be playing Geoff in the film.
Comment by Bob Reed on 5/25 @ 8:02 pm #
Darleen,
It has been my experience that the military generally leads to positive character trait development in folks…
But then, admittedly on this topic I’m biased…
On the other topic, most seem to agree with the POV that you described. Indeed, I was having a lovely discussion one afternoon with fine young lady whe was seemingly well schooled and versed. But when the discussion turned to this same topic, she was clearly in the revisioninst camp, essentially clling me a denier! Heck, she even denied that the ancient Egyptians kept slaves!, or that some modern Arabs still did!…
Only thiose filth caucasion westerners, the Greeks and Romans, kept slaves; and in doing so infectede the entirety of western civilization until the end of the AmeriKKKan civil war…
Kinda was fond of her too; until I realized that she was an educated idiot…
Best Wishes on Memorial day!
Comment by poon on 5/25 @ 8:04 pm #
“GOTTA keep ‘em out of the squishy stuff.”
Nice kick to teh groin of this site’s host, eh?
No charm school in your background I take it, Darleen?
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 8:05 pm #
Yo, Geoff F.: some of us have not only “studied” scientific disciplines, but have actual advanced degrees in them, and get paid for doing actual research.
But I guess that doesn’t measure up to your experiences at the Golden Griddle, so color me suitably chastened.
Comment by newrouter on 5/25 @ 8:06 pm #
paging mr. algore
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 8:07 pm #
And yo, Geoff F: Bob Reed, who’s posting in this thread, is an actual ROCKET SCIENTIST who’s writing (or has written… how’s that coming along, Bob?) a BOOK on the subject.
But I don’t know if he’s ever worked as a data entry clerk or been fired from a shitty programming job, so there’s that.
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 8:08 pm #
poon: FOAD.
Comment by JD on 5/25 @ 8:08 pm #
Falk must be one of nishit’s fellow patients. What a douchenozzle. Oh yeah, I went there Mr. Pompous Arrogant pedantic fuck. You should be embarassed and ashamed, but do us the favor of not mooning us anymore. We are getting tired of seeing your fat pimply hair ass and chocolate starfish.
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 8:09 pm #
Just found my anti-science response to Geoff, from back in the ID thread.
Lots of talk about scientific method, teaching category distinctions, etc.
And in the post proper? I talk of the need to distinguish science from metaphysics. Geoff’s real concern seems to be that, like Nishi, he fears students can’t make those distinctions. And that they’ll become all Christiany.
Guess not everybody can be as smart as they.
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 8:09 pm #
Hee, hee, hee, hee! Here’s another Charles Johnson reference from Geoff, circa yesterday:
Now, where were we? Oh yes, the sciencey righteousness of anthropogenic global warming! Away with you and your Imaginary-Friend-In-The-Sky piddle!
Comment by happyfeet on 5/25 @ 8:10 pm #
Becker and Posner are loopy codgers what are hellbent on seeing America squander shitloads of money fighting the carbon fairy before they do us all a favor and go the fuck away. Sad that they don’t have family members what love them enough to tell them to stop embarrassing themselves.
Comment by JD on 5/25 @ 8:10 pm #
Poon is a Pelosi. And a liar.
Comment by newrouter on 5/25 @ 8:10 pm #
oh my:
Comment by baldilocks on 5/25 @ 8:12 pm #
Anti-theists (as opposed to atheists and agnostics) are crazy, Jeff.
Comment by bh on 5/25 @ 8:13 pm #
I am utterly amazed with the take some people have on protein wisdom.
Mr. Geoff Falk, take a bow, you are an odd creature indeed. If you were safely chained inside a tent, I’d gladly pay a dollar to gawk at you.
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 8:13 pm #
And yet I, and only I, am not allowed to access it.
Yes, Geoff F.
You’re special that way.
Everyone’s out to get you.
You’re the only person in the history of the world who has been banned by Charles Johnson.
It’s starting to look like Geoff F. has a Vitamin H deficiency.
Comment by Dash Rendar on 5/25 @ 8:13 pm #
Hey don’t forget us lowly medical lab types what slave all day over hot prostates and necrotic gall bladders. But for reals, the left academoids like to fashion themselves the barons and dukes of information, thus commanding the golden scepter of science (in which they play no role and whose rigor is foreign to their ilk) against the hated peasants.
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 8:15 pm #
I think Mr Falk has a mental picture of himself as a James Randy surrounded by morons.
And in order to fill his blog with the kinds of posts that make him feel intellectually superior, he’ll intentionally misrepresent the ideas of others, then answer those straw men with pre-written chunks of his own familiar prose.
I say this because that’s what he did both with respect to my post on ID / pedagogy and a post about the economic disaster that certain AGW plans will inevitably bring about.
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 8:16 pm #
Get off my science, freak!
*snort*
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 8:16 pm #
Ah, didn’t know that Dash.
There are quite a number of science and engineering types who post here (and of course, plenty of people from the humanities and lots of extremely smart people who don’t have any formal training at all).
Hell, we’re probably got the makings of a decent selective undergrad college right here in this thread.
Comment by Dash Rendar on 5/25 @ 8:16 pm #
O an they probably read that Pynchon short story Entropy what he did when he was a wee one at Cornell and proclaim mastery over Thermodynamics.
Comment by JD on 5/25 @ 8:18 pm #
bh makes an excellent distinction. There are millions of miles of differences between an atheist and an anti-theist.
Comment by Dash Rendar on 5/25 @ 8:18 pm #
O I agree SBP. I knew Mr Reed was into the aerodynamics and I figured you were at minimum tangentially involved with compsci. But Jeff’s style is certainly refreshing to those of us who didn’t empath our way through the humanities.
Comment by JD on 5/25 @ 8:20 pm #
SBP – Then you have God-bothering short bus riders like myself ….
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 8:21 pm #
Hey, JD, you went to law school, didn’tcha?
Comment by sdferr on 5/25 @ 8:22 pm #
It ain’t as though reason hasn’t had a hand in the business. Was Kant just kidding about that critique of pure reason stuff? Or Quine about the two dogmas of empiricism? Somehow I don’t think so. Reasoning has played the crucial role in putting itself on its own back for the pin, so to speak.
Yet the modern physical sciences project has from its inception been about achieving certainty, hasn’t it Mr Bacon? Making things work how we want them to work when we want them to work. It just hasn’t gotten very far with human cognition yet.
Comment by geoffb on 5/25 @ 8:22 pm #
SBP,
Thank you for using the “F.”.
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 8:23 pm #
Narratology has many of the trappings of science, I assure you.
And I hope that over the years here I’ve proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that knowing how language functions — and being able to elaborate on its abuses by those seeking to control it — is hardly a “squishy” endeavor.
In fact, it’s pretty fucking important, if you ask me.
Which not many do.
Comment by Wm T Sherman on 5/25 @ 8:25 pm #
So many unscientific, irrational people want to put science to use one way or another. Looking for Noah’s Ark in the fossil record, trying to make science their bitch by slandering it as a long-term criminal conspiracy, and so on.
Anybody can do good science. All you have to do is think, communicate, keep records, learn from your mistakes, and not tell lies.
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 8:26 pm #
There are several lawyers on here, I think.
I’ve gathered that bh does something intensively mathematical and financy. Sdferr is a classical Greek and Latin scholar. RTO Trainer is (I think) working on an advanced degree in history. Jeff and Dan come from the literary world.
I’m sure I’m leaving out many people.
Yep, just a bunch of ignorant fucking yahoos. That’s us.
Comment by Obamis XIV on 5/25 @ 8:28 pm #
Okay, that’s funny.
Uhh…
Merci.
Comment by poon on 5/25 @ 8:29 pm #
“Squishy” Yahoos, you mean.
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 8:30 pm #
poon: FOAD. And then FOAD again.
Comment by Dash Rendar on 5/25 @ 8:31 pm #
“Yep, just a bunch of ignorant fucking yahoos.”
Depends how much whiskey was involved.
Comment by sdferr on 5/25 @ 8:31 pm #
Sorry SBP but I haven’t got any Latin to speak of. I can build you a nifty wood jointer plane, like so, though, should you need one.
Comment by bh on 5/25 @ 8:32 pm #
That is — by far — the nicest way anyone has ever described running an illegal craps game in an alley.
Comment by newrouter on 5/25 @ 8:32 pm #
what about safe sex practices in our prisons? i can tell you are not up to date on “wellness” procedures
Comment by lina on 5/25 @ 8:35 pm #
this article is so on point! i myself have a degree in history and when i was trying to find a professor to work with me on my thesis about the german pow program in the us during wwii, i ended up having to work with a german studies (and avowed marxist) prof. because my university didn’t have one professor in american history..needless to say my sessions with him were tense
Comment by JD on 5/25 @ 8:35 pm #
SBP – Why do you hate me? Does anything about me say lawyer?
Poon, on the other hand, is a twat.
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 8:35 pm #
Ah, so it’s just Attic Greek, sdferr?
Should also have mentioned that you have a vast knowledge of the works of other irrelevant dead white men.
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 8:37 pm #
Is the alley located anywhere near UChicago, bh?
‘Cause there are definitely some dicey areas in that neighborhood, I can tell you.
Comment by Darleen on 5/25 @ 8:39 pm #
Bob Reed
Best Wishes to you too.
BTW if you ever meet up with this lady again, pass on to her that I’m not black, yet I’m the descendent of slaves
do watch out for flying brain matter
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 8:39 pm #
I would love to audit this Parrish prick’s class.
Comment by SEK on 5/25 @ 8:39 pm #
Commenting by request:
First, attacking a book like Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher that was written at the height of the culture wars (1994) (the other book discussed being from 1997) and claiming that it’s representative of scholarship today is more than a little disingenuous. Might as well cite a guide for how to fix a 486 to condemn the current state of computing. That said, even if that book were of more recent vintage, I don’t see how it’d be relevant. After all, as y’all are so fond of noting, no one reads academic texts. And the lessons you learn in pedagogy classes? They fall by the wayside once you get in an actual classroom.
For example, most composition teachers are concerned, first and foremost and only, with teaching students how to write better. Want proof? Have some. And keep in mind that I’m currently writing large swaths of the student guide to writing at UCI — and that UCI is the latter-day Yale when it comes to theory in America — so future students will be getting the same critical framework that I’m establishing there. You know, one in which I, for example, create assignments like this:
Can’t you just smell the indoctrination? Imagine how many militant Foucauldians I’ll have created once instructors campus-wide use my nefarious methods.
Second, it’s odd that Darleen cites one “squishy” scholar as a means of discrediting the rest. If all “squishy” scholarship is suspect, then Johnson isn’t a reliable source — unless the only scholarship you define as “squishy” is the kind you don’t like. Johnson’s kosher because he’s saying things Darleen likes right here, but were he to talk about his support of Obama and his policies, I guarantee she’d be using the same language to insult Johnson as she does Johnson’s targets here.
Third, quoting Woods on uncivil language than using uncivil language strikes me as a bit odd. I know Darleen’s embraced the fight-fire-with-fire mentality, but if so, she shouldn’t hold Wood’s definition of civility up as the standard since she’s attacking others on the right for maintaining it.
Fourth, you shouldn’t trust K.C. Johnson’s characterizations of History departments, because not even his friends do. (See the many, many comments here.) From what I can tell, he’s whip-smart on matters pertaining to his small slice of the academic pie, but for reasons discussed in those comments, puts on blinders when speaking about other historians. He’s unable, for example, to understand why a History department that wants to specialize in Latin American history might hire a third Latin American historian instead of someone who’s a constitutional or diplomatic historian. The obvious answer — that they want to specialize in Latin American history — still offends his sensibilities as a constitutional and diplomatic historian.
Comment by JD on 5/25 @ 8:40 pm #
A lawyer? A lawyer?! Why don’t you just call me a Dem, or even worse, a progrssive, or even worse, poon, Sammy, or meya. Why do you hate me?
Comment by Rob Crawford on 5/25 @ 8:40 pm #
There is a certain school of “atheists” who cannot stand the very existence of belief. When they confront the truly tolerant (in the original, not modern sense), they cannot fit them into their tiny, binary little minds. Thus, any who disagree on anything is cast into the role of their darkest demons.
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 8:41 pm #
You’re lucky you got through it without a lawsuit, lina.
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 8:43 pm #
Good call. It’s still growing.
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 8:43 pm #
Second, it’s odd that Darleen cites one “squishy†scholar as a means of discrediting the rest.
No, it’s odd that you spewed up about five reams of boilerplate without bothering to read the entire thread. In particular, Darleen’s #10.
Comment by baldilocks on 5/25 @ 8:44 pm #
“In fact, [language is] pretty fucking important, if you ask me.”
Jeff,
Thank you for putting meat on the bones of intentionalism and how the Left has distorted and continues to distort language. We’ve observed how they’ve done this for decades. Your writings were the first I had seen, however, which mapped out the fraud perpetrated, elaborate as it is.
The Left has dolled up lying and turned it into an art form. They’ve gotten so good at it and become so bold that even some on the Right don’t think they can be stopped. (Of course, some on the “Right” are too stupid to even recognize that they are being had. The GOP’s last candidate for president is a prime example.)
Being able to recognize the lies and being able to explain them is the only way to fight back and you’ve made fighting back so much easier. That’s why they hate you.
Keep on pushing.
Comment by lina on 5/25 @ 8:44 pm #
i’m lucky i got through it without my brain exploding from frustration
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 8:44 pm #
Ah, sorry, JD. I’d assumed that JD was short for Juris Doctor. :-)
Comment by JD on 5/25 @ 8:45 pm #
SEK sure duz haz a purty mouth …
Comment by Rob Crawford on 5/25 @ 8:46 pm #
Fuck off, Squat.
Comment by baldilocks on 5/25 @ 8:48 pm #
“Comment by Rob Crawford on 5/25 @ 8:40 pm #
As protein wisdom is my site, and there are many agnostics (like me) and atheists (like Allah and Charles Johnson and Nishi) who read here
There is a certain school of “atheists†who cannot stand the very existence of belief. When they confront the truly tolerant (in the original, not modern sense), they cannot fit them into their tiny, binary little minds. Thus, any who disagree on anything is cast into the role of their darkest demons.”
Anti-theists, like I said.
Comment by JD on 5/25 @ 8:48 pm #
My parents are, SBP. They are also raving fans of Teh One. I have a far more pedestrian career, selling sports stadiums and synthetic and natural grass fields. – really thought we were friends. I never knew that you thought so little of me.
Comment by SEK on 5/25 @ 8:49 pm #
Rob, I only came here because happyfeet wanted to hear what I had to say, so if you’re offended take it up with him. (Also, remember Wood’s third point? No, obviously you don’t.)
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 8:51 pm #
You know, Scott, if I didn’t know better, I’d assume that you didn’t bother to read what Campbell actually said:
Comment by newrouter on 5/25 @ 8:51 pm #
oh yes another castro/che/chavez professor bravo! i hear bill ayers is available
Comment by bh on 5/25 @ 8:52 pm #
Was the alley by the U of C, SBP? Well, let’s just say that when hf ripped on Becker upthread, a little part of me died inside.
Jeff, ditto on what Julliete said.
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 8:55 pm #
Now, now, JD. Some of my best friends are lawyers.
Comment by SEK on 5/25 @ 8:56 pm #
You know, Scott, if I didn’t know better, I’d assume that you didn’t bother to read what Campbell actually said
I did, and given that the other example he gave was from a 15 year old course, I didn’t put too much weight on his “[r]ecently.”
oh yes another castro/che/chavez professor bravo!
Yes, because a department that has an emphasis on Latin American studies is necessarily going to be pro-Castro/Che/Chavez? Why don’t you read what I linked to and see that the irony: Johnson himself has written on Latin American history. Is your mind blown!?! You thought he was on your team, but it turns out he’s a card-carrying communist!?! Oh no!?!
Wait, sorry, you’d never say something so stupid as that . . . twice.
Comment by JD on 5/25 @ 8:58 pm #
SBP – I will ignore the intended offense then ;-)
Comment by Mahmood Ahmadinejad on 5/25 @ 8:58 pm #
Those dirty Jews made all that up, just like they made up the Holocaust, and for the same reason. They figured that being slaves to the Pharoah gave them an excuse to steal Palestine from its rightful owners. Fast forward a few thousand years and they needed an updated excuse, (the black slaves in America got a country… Liberia!) so the Jew bankers cooked up a scheme to get the whole world at war, and conveniently enough, the “bad guys” were into Jew-killing.
Presto! Jewish National Home, a carbuncle on the ass of Dar-al-Islam, one that badly needs lanced, and insh’allah, I will be the one doing the lancing. Then the Hidden Imam and I will be doing the dancing. Gotta go see how the centrifuges are doing.
Comment by SEK on 5/25 @ 9:02 pm #
Missed this:
No, it’s odd that you spewed up about five reams of boilerplate without bothering to read the entire thread. In particular, Darleen’s #10.
First, doesn’t matter whether Darleen says she likes reading history, since she attacked the institution of academic history departments. Not the same thing.
Second, hard for something that presents specific counter-examples to be “boilerplate.” I mean, you can call it that, but I gave you a chance to see exactly what it is I do in the classroom as a means of refuting the idea that all academic liberals demand their students comply with the dictates of The One. If you like your talking points, ignore it. If you want to see what actually goes on in departments like mine — one in which I’m going to have some small say over what’s taught in the future — the evidence is there for you to examine. If you choose not to, well, you’re not worth the time it took to type this comment.
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 9:02 pm #
What does the one have to do with the other? And so what if the anecdote is 15 years old? What difference does it make?
Comment by newrouter on 5/25 @ 9:03 pm #
oh i forgot peron and allende and ortega
Comment by JD on 5/25 @ 9:04 pm #
So now SEK is quibbling with someone’s definition of recently? Really? And he has the audacity to complain about others playing semantic wordgames. How rich.
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 9:04 pm #
First, doesn’t matter whether Darleen says she likes reading history, since she attacked the institution of academic history departments.
No, she didn’t. She attacked a subset of such programs.
You know, for someone who’s allegedly involved in a “writing program”, your reading skills don’t really appear to be all that impressive.
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 9:05 pm #
There’s all sorts of evidence out there.
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 9:06 pm #
Once you allow yourself to arbitrarily strip a writer of any credibility, it’s all downhill from there.
Comment by newrouter on 5/25 @ 9:07 pm #
dude classroom here i don’t click the link if i think the effort is useless. make an argument here
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 9:07 pm #
I mean, you can call it that, but I gave you a chance to see exactly what it is I do in the classroom
Oh, and SEK?
You might want to Google on “informal fallacies” and then read the section on “hasty generalization”.
What you as an individual do, or do not do, in the classroom has no bearing on whether this is a general problem.
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 9:07 pm #
Maybe Wood would change his third point if a little prick who’d accused him of “threatening someone with violence” presumed to show up at his door acting like he owned the joint.
Piss off, Scott.
Comment by happyfeet on 5/25 @ 9:08 pm #
Campbell’s students said all the other professors had told them who to vote for. That’s very abusive of authority I think. If it had been a Wal-Mart manager what done it the left would go ballistic. I know cause that story’s a perennial. If there’s a universal code of ethics for professors it’s either a lot ignored or it’s a joke I think.
And thank you Mr. SEK and I wouldn’t hesitate to take a class from you but your American West friends would probably ban me from the classroom. They’re so mean.
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 9:09 pm #
Oh, that probably happened like a million years ago. Don’t even worry about it.
Comment by Darleen on 5/25 @ 9:13 pm #
And I hope that over the years here I’ve proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that knowing how language functions — and being able to elaborate on its abuses by those seeking to control it — is hardly a “squishy†endeavor.
JeffG
Your essays here on the subject are, for me, like auditing a college course and I certainly don’t consider how language functions “squishy”. I also wouldn’t mind taking history under professors like KC Johnson or VDH or Douglas Campbell … they are honest scholars.
Parrish and ilk, not so much.
Comment by The Monster on 5/25 @ 9:14 pm #
Funny thing about that. Much of what you’d need to know to fix a 486 still applies today. Sure, we have more sophisticated instruction sets, tons more RAM, and IRQs can be automatically assigned in virtually all cases, and yet….
Did you know that, just like a 486, every Intel x86 architecture chip, including the hot new dual- and quad-core offerings from both Intel and AMD, at power-up are running in “real mode”, in which they function just like the 8088 chips used for the original IBM PC (“640K should be enough for anyone”)?
Similarly, education majors who are indoctrinated to believe that it is their job to teach collectivist thought will continue to operate in that mode for decades after they earn their sheepskin.
Comment by SEK on 5/25 @ 9:16 pm #
Piss off, Scott.
I did and will again. happyfeet wanted me to pipe up in this thread, so I did. Now I’ll bow out and let you and everyone else curse and attack me while pretending that we’re still living in the ’90s while not on clicking on links because they’d rather not learn that they’re wrong. Have at it, folks. It’s been, well, exactly what I expected it to be.
Comment by newrouter on 5/25 @ 9:16 pm #
is there a work around for the deviled eggs if you don’t have the special sauce?
Comment by poon on 5/25 @ 9:17 pm #
“I also wouldn’t mind taking history under professors like KC Johnson or VDH or Douglas Campbell … they are honest scholars.”
Douglas G. Campbell is a lecturer with the Department of Recreation and Parks Management at California State University at Chico
Que?
Comment by newrouter on 5/25 @ 9:19 pm #
dude: welcome to 2001 and hope and change: copy, paste, link
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 9:20 pm #
poon: FOAD. Three times.
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 9:20 pm #
Poor put upon Scott, once again splashed by the cold water of world-weary expectation! Why oh why did he fool himself into thinking that today — just this once – he’d be met with reasoned debate, even when it is clear none but he (and those like him; did he tell you he was writing student guides? Well, he is, so reasonable and fair is he) is reasonable?
He has learned his lesson this time, though. Still — because he is a champion of truth — he can’t promise he won’t be back again some day, against his better judgment, to fight the good fight.
– and if that don’t work, he can always accuse Jeff of threatening someone with violence, with not a bit of evidence to back it up.
What? Desperate times and all that…
Comment by JD on 5/25 @ 9:21 pm #
SEK – Did you demonstrate that recently was used wrong, or did you just do an asspull on that one? Then, once we know that the use of the asspull is acceptable for you to score rhetorical points, is it not reasonable for us to think that might not be the only asspull you utilized to score your rhetorical points?
Comment by newrouter on 5/25 @ 9:21 pm #
Douglas Campbell: The History of Latin American Tourists Parks for North Americans
Comment by bh on 5/25 @ 9:22 pm #
True story:
After reading a post from Scott (SEK), I actually had to ask Jeff a little bit about his background because it was so poorly reasoned the most likely explanation seemed to be that Scott was not very bright.
Jeff explained that Scott is bright enough to know exactly what he’s doing as he crafts his statements.
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 9:24 pm #
It’s been, well, exactly what I expected it to be.
1) SEK writes a sneering post chock-full of non sequiturs and logical fallacies.
2) SEK gets called on it.
3) SEK starts playing victim.
Yeah, it is fairly predictable, isn’t it?
Comment by happyfeet on 5/25 @ 9:24 pm #
I hadn’t thought I would get in trouble. We used to like Scott and I’m very very bad at unliking people. Except for Christian Bale. That was easy. This was a tailor-made SEK thread though cause of Johnson is in it and academia generally and humanities specifically. More though is I’m genuinely curious about how angry Parrish is and what’s up with that. Scott’s never been angry academic leftish guy and he’s very academic and leftish so I was curious about what he would make of this.
Comment by newrouter on 5/25 @ 9:24 pm #
your mother wears army boots
Comment by Darleen on 5/25 @ 9:25 pm #
Still catching up and looky
kosher because he’s saying things Darleen likes right here, but were he to talk about his support of Obama and his policies, I guarantee she’d be using the same language to insult Johnson as she does Johnson’s targets here.
SEK is reading my mind!!! what a talent! Scott you oughta be in Vegas!
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 9:26 pm #
Right, because when a writer says “recently”, he really means the 90’s.
Comment by JD on 5/25 @ 9:26 pm #
I are a dum simpeltun. Them there smart peepul lyke SEK shur dew hav a weigh with them wordz, and he shoor duz haz a purty mouth.
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 9:26 pm #
Or, if you don’t like his conclusions, then he means whatever it’s convenient for you to have him mean.
Comment by SEK on 5/25 @ 9:27 pm #
Christ, newrouter, what I did copy and paste contained these:
In that same post, you need to read over the tear-Scott-a-new-one comments on the first Dark Knight post. Select the one that attacked me most successfully and explain why you think it did . . .
By 11:59 p.m. on Sunday, you need to have torn me a new one in a comment on the second Dark Knight post . . .
Take the time to read what I did copy-and-paste before you complain that I’m not copying-and-pasting enough.
But — because he is a champion of truth, he can’t promise he won’t be back again some day, against his better judgment, to fight the good fight.
I was asked to comment by a friend who’s a regular here and I did. That’s it. Whatever other petty issues you have with me, you’re more than welcome to take them up with me, directly. As should be obvious by the fact that I invite my students to attack me — seriously, read those links, see what my kids called me — I’m no wilting flower. (I lasted four years here, after all, until y’all blew your gaskets when the Republicans lost control of the White House.) (Which isn’t to say you’re Republicans, obviously, just that you’re finding it very, very difficult to live in a world where people who don’t share any of your ideological assumptions are in power.) But whatever. I’m not the issue here. happyfeet wanted a dissenting voice, I provided one, backed it up with evidence of what I do in the classroom and what I’m doing campus-wide in the program next year, and you can make of that what you will. (Though you won’t make anything of it, preferring instead to make this about you, when what I wrote here manifestly wasn’t.)
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 9:27 pm #
Scott who accused me of threatening violence? Scott who told people I’d banned him when I hadn’t?
Has that Scott — the fair, dispassionate scholar — ever corrected the record?
Yeah, I didn’t think so.
Luckily for him, I don’t find him important enough to try to trash his reputation with a lot of bullshit.
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 9:28 pm #
Besides, how long has it been since Marx wrote anything?
Comment by newrouter on 5/25 @ 9:28 pm #
does anyone know what the insult from this is?:
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 9:29 pm #
Hmm…. maybe it dates back to the days of camp followers?
I don’t know. Interesting question.
Comment by SEK on 5/25 @ 9:30 pm #
P.S. happy, I’m not mad at you, but given the way people respond to dissent here now, it did take me a couple of hours to muster up the nerve to respond. So I hope I didn’t get you in trouble, and as for the rest, well, it’s not like they could think any less of me, so whatever.
Comment by newrouter on 5/25 @ 9:31 pm #
yea right attack the peon giving out the grade. i’d do it if the shit they were selling me was free.
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 9:32 pm #
Yes. I’m making this about me.
I am.
Not the guy who is citing a freshman comp assignment he came up with as proof that there is no bias in the Humanities toward a particular way of thinking.
Noted.
(By the way, if that stings, just accuse me of having banned you and threatened someone with a serious ass-whompin’!)
Comment by JD on 5/25 @ 9:33 pm #
Recently means whatever SEK wants it to mean !!!!
And SUK gets to decide if/when it is banned.
Comment by newrouter on 5/25 @ 9:35 pm #
i think ww 2 vintage but great fun to taunt other kids years ago
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 9:36 pm #
This is evidently the kind of passive aggressiveness SEK uses when he wants to put those who find his citing of himself as evidence for refuting a trend on the defensive.
YOU JUST CAN’T HANDLE SCOTT’S BLAZING TORCH OF TRUTH, WINGNUTS!
Comment by sdferr on 5/25 @ 9:37 pm #
So what do you think hf? Has SEK persuaded you that the professoriat in the going concerns known as universities just aren’t in general as grossly political as Mr Campbell seems to think? Or that they are really as critically open as SEK’s proffered examples would have it? Do you think SEK would attest that he has just never seen anything of the sort that Mr Campbell describes? Or if SEK had seen anything of that sort, that he would be sure to mention it here and in this context?
Comment by newrouter on 5/25 @ 9:37 pm #
what about safe sex practices in our nations prisons?
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 9:38 pm #
Scott’s never adopted an angry tone.
Not the same thing.
Libeling calmly is nothing to take undue pride in.
Comment by SEK on 5/25 @ 9:38 pm #
THIS COMMENT THREAD IS NOW ALL ABOUT JEFF. (SORRY DARLEEN.)
Scott who accused me of threatening violence?
If we’re talking about correcting the record, Jeff, I never commented on that. Want proof? Of course you don’t. You’re just assuming that anyone who disagrees with you on that count was in for the penny and the pound, but whatever.
Scott who told people I’d banned him when I hadn’t?
I can’t believe I didn’t try to comment after you deleted what I’d written and said I couldn’t post here anymore. In the future, I’ll be a bigger dick and test a ban instead of taking you at your word. Because being a dick’ll earn me some respect here, right? OUTLAW?
Comment by newrouter on 5/25 @ 9:41 pm #
ot the O! loses canada:
?
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 9:41 pm #
I deleted a trackback and told you to stop sending them. I didn’t delete what you’d written.
And you don’t have to prove to me you’re a dick. You’ve got that covered already, trust me.
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 9:41 pm #
Let’s see:
On the one hand, we have SEK asking students to “attack” his interpretation of a Batman comic.
On the other hand, we have this.
Hmm… well, I’m convinced!
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 9:41 pm #
Come on, Jeff. Scott’s anecdote thoroughly rebuts Campbell’s several anecdotes, including the one about what he, as a teacher, is required to read, presumably as a prerequisite to his continued employment. Why?
BECAUSE! THAT’S WHY!
Comment by JD on 5/25 @ 9:43 pm #
Being a dick will be different than your normal not-at-all pompous, not-the-least-bit pedantic, never to be confused with arrogant self?
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 9:47 pm #
See that stuff in bold, Scott? Those are all things that didn’t happen by any stretch of the imagination. Perhaps, being the wordsmith that you are, you could help me find a way to decorously tell you that you’re full of shit. If you could work “fucking liar” into it, I’m sure I could deliver it quite convincingly.
Comment by Darleen on 5/25 @ 9:48 pm #
THIS COMMENT THREAD IS NOW ALL ABOUT JEFF. (SORRY DARLEEN.)
Scott, did you lose your binky?
Comment by SEK on 5/25 @ 9:48 pm #
yea right attack the peon giving out the grade. i’d do it if the shit they were selling me was free.
Read the comments. You know you look stupid when the facts in evidence directly contradict what you say, don’t you?
This is evidently the kind of passive aggressiveness SEK uses when he wants to put those who find his citing of himself as evidence for refuting a trend on the defensive.
It’s not passive-aggressiveness: it’s citing actual evidence, instead of half-recalled pedagogy classes from fifteen-odd years ago. My point, as you’d realize if you read what I’d written, is that those sort of doctrinaire approaches taken as the culture war waned aren’t representative of the field at large. As proof, I presented evidence from a class at a school that’s considered a Church of High Theory, and told you that the person in charge of that class will have say over the entire course next year. I’m talking trends here, you’re arguing with ghosts from the ’90s. (Which, yes, still have substance on occasion, but such is tenure.)
Do you think SEK would attest that he has just never seen anything of the sort that Mr Campbell describes? Or if SEK had seen anything of that sort, that he would be sure to mention it here and in this context?
Not only would he, he has in the past, edits a reactionary literary blog that shuns such overtly political methodologies (The Valve), and is friends with scholars approvingly cited in that article (Mark Bauerlein). I’d link to everything I wrote about Theory’s Empire, but no one would read it, so what’s the point? Seriously, when I’m linking to what I actually do, all this assuming merely proves that some cliches live on for a reason.
Comment by sdferr on 5/25 @ 9:51 pm #
It is odd too that Darleen was pretty clear this Sean Parrish fellow was the particular source of her ire and yet, SEK doesn’t bother to mention Parrish at all. Writes him right out, in fact.
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 9:51 pm #
Jesus, Scott. Don’t you talk about yourself enough at the other sites you write for? Must you bang your own drum here, as well? You cited yourself. And you didn’t even address the very real Mr Parrish at all.
You’re a liar. Hell, you even lied about pissing off.
Comment by JD on 5/25 @ 9:55 pm #
instead of half-recalled pedagogy classes from fifteen-odd years ago
Note the recurrent asspull here … SEK gets to define the word recently however he wishes.
And he is most certainly not trying to make this all about SEK. Nope. It is not happening. Parrish does not exist.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 5/25 @ 9:55 pm #
Funny thing is, I’ve never seen SEK actually offer reasoned debate. I’ve seen him beat around the bushes, I’ve seen him deny what was placed before his eyes. I’ve seen him intellectually overwhelmed and reduced to sputtering.
I will never bother responding with reason to a person uninterested in actual reason, and SEK’s built up quite a history of that.
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 9:55 pm #
Your evidence for “half-recalled pedagogy classes from fifteen odd years ago” is that in Campbell’s writing “recently” = 15 years ago because in a seperate anecdote, “a few years ago” = 15 years ago. Which is to say that you know what Campbell really means, despite it being contrary to what he says. Bullshit.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 5/25 @ 9:56 pm #
All leftists read minds. It’s one of their many Super Powers, and how they know that everyone disagreeing with them does so from bad faith.
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 9:57 pm #
Somebody should find out what he thinks about Scott’s take on Batman.
Comment by SEK on 5/25 @ 9:58 pm #
See that stuff in bold, Scott? Those are all things that didn’t happen by any stretch of the imagination. Perhaps, being the wordsmith that you are, you could help me find a way to decorously tell you that you’re full of shit. If you could work “fucking liar†into it, I’m sure I could deliver it quite convincingly.
Christ, the Patterico thread’s dead, but if those links weren’t, it’d be obvious: Jeff said something to someone unfamiliar with his shtick that was interpreted at face value. Dangers of the internet. Jeff didn’t avoid them. Courted the worst possible reaction and got it. Deserved to be banned.
You’ll note, however, that I said it was ban-worthy. As in, “is easily misunderstood” and not “time to involve the police.” But whatever.
Jeff, please ban me now so I’m not tempted to return to your cesspool. I’ll even grant you permission to continue to make fun of me after the ban without anyone calling you a hypocrite.
Comment by newrouter on 5/25 @ 9:59 pm #
ot on wearing army boots:
?
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 9:59 pm #
Pablo –
SEK will just reply that he was merely giving a characterization of the uproar between me, P, and nk — that he wasn’t taking one position or the other.
And worse, he likely believes he pulled it off.
Comment by baldilocks on 5/25 @ 10:00 pm #
“I’ll even grant you permission to continue to make fun of me after the ban without anyone calling you a hypocrite.”
Pure comedy.
Comment by bh on 5/25 @ 10:02 pm #
On the plus side, we’ve identified the post that first made me wonder if Scott was perhaps a bit slow.
Comment by happyfeet on 5/25 @ 10:02 pm #
That’s the nice thing about carousels I think except not really. Melancholy is how I feel.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 5/25 @ 10:02 pm #
Ah, but those events are now part of the Pravda. They must be true because, were they not true, SEK might be wrong. It’s axiomatic that SEK can never be wrong, therefore those events happened.
Facts are immaterial when dealing with Pravda. Only what is useful matters to the Pravda.
Comment by Darleen on 5/25 @ 10:05 pm #
Scott
You know what I don’t understand… is how people like Bill Ayers (or Angela Davis), who wouldn’t pass the most rudimentary of background checks to work in a bank or in any government position, is welcomed and lauded in a university setting.
But considering your first comment on this thread was to engage in all sort of mischaracterization of my post and Carnacking my motives, thoughts and future reactions, I’m not surprised.
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 10:05 pm #
Lie
Lie .
Lie.
Lie.
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 10:06 pm #
You mean to nk, who’s so unfamiliar with Jeff that he offered his own thorough interpretation on the myriad details of Jeff’s personal and family life? Bullshit.
You mean he pushed back against a guy who was attacking him with childish abandon? The one who said he ought to show up at Tony’s seminar in Chicago and laugh at the pussy boys assembled therein? Oh, but then Jeff suggested that he would be invited to participate, a dastardly threat of violence! How dare he!
On, indeed. You threaten to bring a tree to a confrontation, and you’re just looking for the ban stick.
You’re not stupid, Scott. Which leaves liar as the available option.
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 10:07 pm #
But remember: SEK never said I threatened someone with physical violence. And he was banned from this site. By me.
Seriously. Trust him. Happyfeet likes him, so he must of necessity be okay.
Comment by bh on 5/25 @ 10:08 pm #
I stumbled with that at first.
Comment by happyfeet on 5/25 @ 10:09 pm #
You liked him first.
Comment by Darleen on 5/25 @ 10:11 pm #
Rehashing… I find this snort worthy
quoting Woods on uncivil language than using uncivil language strikes me as a bit odd. I know Darleen’s embraced the fight-fire-with-fire mentality, but if so, she shouldn’t hold Wood’s definition of civility up as the standard since she’s attacking others on the right for maintaining it.
Context…. right over Scotts pointy head. (clue Scott, I’m not writing a reply AS a “scholar” IN a scholars’ association website … and I don’t wear white shoes after Labor day)
Comment by ushie on 5/25 @ 10:11 pm #
I see Mr. Parrish is not an English major.
Comment by newrouter on 5/25 @ 10:12 pm #
O!’s mother wears communist boots
Comment by bh on 5/25 @ 10:14 pm #
It appears I picked the right day to make this comment:
Comment by dicentra on 5/25 @ 10:15 pm #
‘Cause there are definitely some dicey areas in that neighborhood…. hey hey hey hey hey. I could take that the wrong way.
Also. Lefty profs give out all kinds of not-blatantly-lefty assignments during a given semester. It’s just that all their assumptions about what constitutes useful knowledge is informed by the same lefty assumptions, many of which don’t scream “LEFTY” at you unless you happen to compare them to not-lefty assumptions.
Which never happens. Lefties are constitutionally unable to deal with non-lefty positions without caricaturing them. It’s that abundance of empathy that trips them up.
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 10:15 pm #
Yeah. I’m off to watch some TV.
Comment by happyfeet on 5/25 @ 10:16 pm #
I’m gonna watch tv too.
Comment by Darleen on 5/25 @ 10:17 pm #
here’s a thought to SEK’s flailing about that universities are DEFINITELY NOT BASTIONS OF COLLECTIVISM PREDICATED ON SOCIAL JUSTICE TURNING ON THE THREE SPOKES OF GENDER/RACE/CLASS …
I ended my post with Caveat Parentis …. SEK is scared parents might like to take a closer look before signing that tuition check… LOOK AWAY! LOOK AWAY!
Comment by sdferr on 5/25 @ 10:18 pm #
Heh.
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 10:19 pm #
Me, I’m gonna bring this here tree over there and kill you.
Comment by ushie on 5/25 @ 10:20 pm #
OMDFG, SEK…one of the reasons I quit teaching is that a perfectly fine essay in one of the books was replaced by one extolling the cultural impact of The Spice Girls.
So, basically fuck you and everything you ever say, think, and stand for.
Comment by SEK on 5/25 @ 10:26 pm #
Not banned yet? Damn it.
Lie.
Dude, you’re not an idiot: Patterico understood it to be a threat because it sounded like one and he was unfamiliar with your shtick. I’m not sure why you can’t admit that. Patterico was the one who banned you because, to him, your words sounded like a threat. How, exactly, is that a lie? (Of course, you’ll respond by saying “Lie,” even though it manifestly isn’t one, as evidenced by the fact that he banned you. But whatever. You’ve got you’re head in the sand on this one.)
But remember: SEK never said I threatened someone with physical violence. And he was banned from this site. By me.
If you repeat it enough times, it’ll be true. By the way, if you repeat it enough times, it’ll true. Have I mentioned that if you repeat it enough times, it’ll be true? Because if you repeat it enough times, it’ll be true.
You mean to nk, who’s so unfamiliar with Jeff that he offered his own thorough interpretation on the myriad details of Jeff’s personal and family life? Bullshit.
No, Pablo, I meant Patterico, who’s the one who did the banning. You’re not stupid either, so you should’ve realized this. As should Jeff, but he’s got the word “lie” stuck in his head, and of course all these comments are about Darleen’s post, not Jeff.
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 10:28 pm #
Y’all noticed that he’s still commenting here, right?
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 10:31 pm #
Are you fucking kidding me? Sweet Flying Spaghetti Monster!
Comment by ushie on 5/25 @ 10:32 pm #
About Mr. Parrish–by the looks of his photo, and the…incoherence of his writing, I bet he ain’t never got laid. Possibly got some drunk chick to puke into his lap once, though.
Comment by ushie on 5/25 @ 10:32 pm #
Jeez, SEK, you promised a lot of comments ago that you would leave.
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 10:33 pm #
5/13/200-fucking-4. I take it back, Scott. Maybe you are stupid.
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 10:33 pm #
Not only that, Pablo, but those of us who’ve been around here for a while know what it takes to get banned from here.
It’s damned near impossible.
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 10:34 pm #
We’re not talking about Patterico. We’re talking about you. Pablo quoted you. You saying it was a threat of violence. You.
Which is a lie. Period.
And I never banned you. I deleted a trackback. I didn’t delete what you’d written.
These are lies. You’re being called out on them. You — not Patterico, not nk: YOU.
Stop flailing around for some place else to direct attention. You said I threatened someone with violence. I did not. Patterico knew it. So did nk. And so did you.
If you were the dispassionate scholar you pretend to be, you’d have acknowledged the errors already, apologized, and moved on. Instead, you just keep doubling down.
Which is what liars do.
Comment by SEK on 5/25 @ 10:34 pm #
Y’all noticed that he’s still commenting here, right?
After Jeff came to my place and told me I wasn’t banned, but that the whole “delete what you said and you’re not welcome here anymore” thing wasn’t a “real” banning. Again, I should’ve been a dick and tested it, but it’s not in my nature.
But he should totally ban me now. Seriously. I’m wasting my time here at this point. So ban me already. Please?
Comment by Darleen on 5/25 @ 10:36 pm #
Patterico understood it to be a threat because it sounded like one and he was unfamiliar with your shtick.
wow … that’s like
…. wow
who are you trying to convince, Scott, cuz that is just too incredibly stupid to believe.
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 10:37 pm #
Apparently, neither is retracting false statements.
Comment by JD on 5/25 @ 10:39 pm #
SUK is proving to be a liar. He cannot be that stupid. Can he?
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 10:39 pm #
I deleted a trackback.
Does it really infuriate that much that I never actually victimized you?
Comment by JD on 5/25 @ 10:40 pm #
BAN ME !!!! PLEASE !!!! I CANNOT HELP MYSELF !!!!!!!! YOU MUST CURE ME OR I WILL CONTINUE TO LIE AND SHOW MY ASS TO THE WORLD !!!!!!!!
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 10:41 pm #
Yup. And you are ostensibly “familiar with his schtick.”
Comment by SBP on 5/25 @ 10:42 pm #
His whole worldview depends on being a victim, Jeff.
As an (I assume) white male, he simply doesn’t have many victim chips to play, so he has to hustle for ‘em where he can.
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 10:42 pm #
Does SEK’s post bother to reproduce my “threat”?
I would wager not, because if so, his commenters might just have called him out for interpreting my bringing a tree to my own hanging as a threat against the hangman.
Liars are careful to gloss over things like that. Makes their lies appear stronger.
Comment by SEK on 5/25 @ 10:42 pm #
You saying it was a threat of violence.
And I linked to a comment of yours (conveniently, for you, no longer on the internet) in which you said you’d beat somebody down. Then acted all surprised when someone thought that you might’ve meant it, given that you say it all the time but never do it, blah blah blah. You don’t want to own up to your words, or accept the fact that they could be misinterpreted. Fine. Whatever. But then as now, Jeff, you’re playing the martyr. (Have you taken the site down temporarily lately? Because that always plays well.)
And I never banned you. I deleted a trackback. I didn’t delete what you’d written.
If you don’t think this comment sounds like a ban, you’ve spent too long being an asshole on the internet.
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 10:44 pm #
Alright, I give up! Just get away from me with that tree.
Comment by SEK on 5/25 @ 10:44 pm #
Does SEK’s post bother to reproduce my “threat�
I linked to it. Link’s dead. For your benefit, not mine. Deal.
Comment by Darleen on 5/25 @ 10:45 pm #
Does it really infuriate that much that I never actually victimized you?
Maybe Scott should meet up with Geoff of the “I’m the only person ever banned by LGF” at a local Starbucks where they comisserate over a couple of Caramel Macchiatos.
Comment by JD on 5/25 @ 10:47 pm #
Let’s see if I get SUK’s narrative of this one – I interpreted something to be a ban, despite the person with the ability to actually do the banning telling me explicitly that it was not a ban, therefore I privilege my interpretation over the explicitly stated meaning of the words from the person that said them. Makes perfect fucking sense.
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 10:48 pm #
When he showed up, as threatened, at Tony’s wrestling seminar to laugh at the spandex clad faggots assembled there.
You’re full of shit, Scott.
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 10:51 pm #
Uh, no. The gist of it is in my #262, and it is not to your benefit. But Patterico says he can reproduce all of the comments on that thread at any time. Maybe he can help you out of this one.
Comment by cranky-d on 5/25 @ 10:54 pm #
Man, I wish I could change reality by wishing. If I pretend really hard that I’m rich, maybe it will happen.
Comment by cranky-d on 5/25 @ 10:55 pm #
Nothing so far.
Comment by Swen Swenson on 5/25 @ 10:56 pm #
Absolutely! You can get carbon dioxide anywhere. They sell it in slabs at the gorcery store. But do you have any idea how hard it is to find good nitrous oxide? Wandering around with whipped cream on your nose, I mean, how demeaning!
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 10:56 pm #
It’s not convenient for me that the supposed “threat” is no longer available, because it allows you to pretend it was a threat. There was no promise of a beatdown. There was me saying that I’d handle it the way I always do. I also said something to the effect that no lawyers would be involved — which, given that I was responding to a bunch of lawyers, seemed rather sensible of me at the time.
You are a liar, Scott. And the reason you can’t get to those comments is because Patterico took them down. He did so in exchange for me removing a post that questioned his honor for having characterized the exchange as he had.
Before you go about pretending you’re banned, you might want to make sure next time. Because you weren’t. Which made your entire post about my “hypocrisy” laughable.
You aren’t a victim, Scott. You aren’t fighting a good fight.
You are a liar who got caught with his pants down. And you don’t even have enough self assurance to admit you made a mistake and falsely libeled me in a rush to make my fight with Patterico about you.
Because that’s what your post was — and attempt to point out my hypocrisy based on your supposed victimization at my hands.
But I don’t fear what you have to say, Scott. Never have.
You just don’t much rate ever since you showed yourself to be a dishonest hack.
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 11:03 pm #
Really?
Oh, yeah. That screams BANNED!!!
Comment by SEK on 5/25 @ 11:04 pm #
For the record, all these comments about Jeff aren’t about Jeff. My first comment actually wasn’t, but Jeff’s? He just couldn’t let a chance to talk about himself slip by.
Just let that sit there, you know, for the record. Sorry feets and Darleen, I tried to respond, but Jeff couldn’t make it about anything other than Jeff. Is it any wonder most liberal blogs don’t link back or refer to him as Gold/stein? (What with them not being nearly so interested in Jeff as Jeff is.)
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 11:04 pm #
Heh. Check out the last comment to that post where I supposedly banned SEK.
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 11:08 pm #
(Crossposted at acephalous, egde of the west, the valve, et al.!)
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 11:10 pm #
Right. Your first comment was about you, not Jeff.
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 11:11 pm #
Heh.
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 11:12 pm #
Oh, the cool blogs use Godlstein.
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 11:14 pm #
It’s because they don’t really care about me and aren’t interested in what I have to say, Pablo.
It has nothing to do with my fighting back.
Which reminds me, what ever happened to Thersites first blog?
Comment by Swen Swenson on 5/25 @ 11:15 pm #
Proving once again that if you don’t believe in something you’ll fall for anything? Personally, I believe in science and AGW ain’t it. AGW only works if you ignore all of the proxy data on the earth’s climate record prior to 1950. So they do. Willfully. It’s like a cult or something and the goracle is their oracle.
Snatch them and take them to the geology museum for deprogramming.
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 11:15 pm #
For that matter, Jeff’s first comment was about you too. Cool, huh?
Comment by Swen Swenson on 5/25 @ 11:16 pm #
Yearch! That had to be Freudian..
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 11:17 pm #
IIRC, you sent evil henchmen to rape his children. Or something.
Poof!
Comment by bh on 5/25 @ 11:17 pm #
I think his martyrdom at Jeff’s hands is kinda about him as well.
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 11:20 pm #
To be fair, Pablo, my first comment was about who “John” was. My 11th comment in the thread was directed at Scott.
Of course, that’s if you count the thread as having started before Scott arrived.
Which Scott doesn’t. For obvious reasons.
Comment by maggie katzen on 5/25 @ 11:25 pm #
oh, I watched tv first. I’m always doing things backwards.
Comment by Pablo on 5/25 @ 11:25 pm #
Shit, I knew I’d get caught up in that. So, that new book is coming along nicely, isn’t it?
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 11:28 pm #
Wow.
He must think we were really reading him.
That’s kinda sweet, in a sad way.
Comment by maggie katzen on 5/25 @ 11:36 pm #
only when you paste it over here.
Comment by poon on 5/25 @ 11:40 pm #
Speaking of wishful thinking(traffic wise), didn’t this site used to have a link to sitemeter?
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/25 @ 11:45 pm #
I lost sitemeter when the server crashed. Alexa has rankings though.
If I sell ads again I’ll add a traffic tracker. Otherwise, what does it matter? Either you visit or you don’t.
Comment by happyfeet on 5/25 @ 11:48 pm #
oh. Hi maggie I thought about you when I saw this the other day… not at first it was when they busted out with the Amy Winehouse I thought I need to link this for maggie next time I see her. Also I’m sorry about causing all so much trouble but still some day I hope we can turn the page on this stuff because … ok I don’t know why because I just remember that SEK threads used to be very nice threads and amiable and now they are fractious threads.
Comment by maggie katzen on 5/25 @ 11:53 pm #
oh, thanks. a lot of my friends have been raving about it. but I don’t usually watch new things, so I missed it. I guess it doesn’t start for reals until the fall.
Comment by maggie katzen on 5/26 @ 12:13 am #
but so, tonight I watched Thais which didn’t really get me, story wise, till the very end. Mostly I just wondered at how easy Fleming makes it look.
Later this week will be Orfeo ed Euridice I luv, luv, luv Stephanie Blythe.
Comment by Makewi on 5/26 @ 12:22 am #
My favorite bit of SEK was when he was busy pretending that the outrage over the crass statements made about Tony Snow’s death from cancer was worse or at least equal to the crass statements themselves.
Comment by maggie katzen on 5/26 @ 12:28 am #
no, no, the best was when he misrepresented our problem with Scott Beauchamp as being because we didn’t think soldiers did bad things. Not because Beauchamp’s stories set of many, many BS alarms amongst other soldiers.
Comment by maggie katzen on 5/26 @ 12:30 am #
speaking of fighting, Makewi, how does one pronounce your handle? RTO and I had a “discussion” about it one night.
Comment by dicentra on 5/26 @ 12:36 am #
This thread is reminding me of the dust-up between Glenn Beck and the harpies at The View over who said hello to whom first on the train, and who reserved the seats Babs and Whoopie sat in. If it wasn’t Babs herself. Which it probably was.
The subject being utterly pointless but the way people argue about it highly revealing.
Comment by maggie katzen on 5/26 @ 12:41 am #
DIAF, dicentra.
j/k though, I do find it interesting that I sometimes get drawn into arguments over some of the strangest things. like celebrity impersonators.
Comment by RTO Trainer on 5/26 @ 12:41 am #
feets, I woke up a bit unhappy with you the other day. I had dreamed I was being chased by a horde of angry dirty socialist hungarian muppets.
I blame you.
Comment by RTO Trainer on 5/26 @ 1:24 am #
These muppets.
Comment by Swen Swenson on 5/26 @ 1:43 am #
Great oogly moogly! I finally read through the entire thread — yes, I have no one but myself to blame — and I have a perhaps silly question that’s completely beside the point (or not): WTF is with this begging to be banned stuff? The most memorable incident involved she who shall not be named, who was certifiable. Cuckoo. Nuts. Crazy as a craphouse rat even. Which made it understandable in the sense that I realized there was no point in trying to understand it.
About 50 posts ago I got the distinct feeling of deja vu. I guess what I’m trying to say is ‘wouldn’t a normal person who doesn’t want to be here just go away?’ I’m not trying to pick on SEK — don’t have a god in that fight — but damn, that’s just weird and I’ve never seen the like anywhere else.
It’s not like you get 72 virgins for becoming a blog martyr, is it? What does one hope to gain by being banned? Bragging rights — “I didn’t quit they had to throw me out” — is that it?? I don’t much care for pop psych, so I suppose I shouldn’t speculate so or expect a satisfying answer, but dayum..
Comment by Makewi on 5/26 @ 2:50 am #
Makewi
Mah-keh-vee
Comment by SBP on 5/26 @ 4:34 am #
#291: Mine was when he was having the vapors over the mere suggestion that His Holiness Barack I, Lord of ACORN, Defender of the Marxist Faith, might possibly have had some “help” while writing his two books.
Comment by SBP on 5/26 @ 4:37 am #
That was the thread Jeff linked in #270.
Comment by SBP on 5/26 @ 4:47 am #
See also here.
Comment by SBP on 5/26 @ 5:10 am #
In an article published just a couple of days ago, Prof. Cashill notes that he is still working on this.
I’m still not convinced, personally, but this certainly serves as further evidence to refute SEK’s claim of “absurdity”.
Comment by JHoward on 5/26 @ 5:54 am #
With no evident hesitation to occupy a seat in the academy. With an ability, dammit, to occupy a seat in the academy. With a veritable mandate to house such earnest integrity there, issuing it in large swaths.
Comment by serr8d on 5/26 @ 5:59 am #
Having quickly read Sean Parrish’s various sequelae, I’m thinking this “University of South Florida” grad student very closely resembles our own Thor. Except for his lack of mention of brutish hicks and rednecks, of course.
Comment by JHoward on 5/26 @ 6:04 am #
Weasel.
Comment by Salt Lick on 5/26 @ 6:50 am #
It rained hard here last night, so this morning lots of box turtles occupied the paths when we walked the dogs. They made me think of happyfeet, and I gave thanks I’d not mulched them into turtleburgers while mowing yesterday. It’s hard to get the shell pieces out of the patties.
Comment by thor on 5/26 @ 7:05 am #
You bitter hicks and your feculent pool of whimpers and tears sure make for boring banter.
O!
There, Jeff, I branded your hicksite with my salutary mark of the Devil himself. And you so warned me, no!
Even though you walk through the valley of the shadow of Hicks, fear no hick, for O! is with you; His rod and his staff, may they comfort you, hick.
Enjoy.
Pingback by Diagramming Fail. [JHoward] on 5/26 @ 7:10 am #
[...] to Protein Wisdom homepage « Reason isn’t just sleeping … [Darleen Click] | Home | May 26, 2009 Diagramming Fail. [...]
Comment by Bob Reed on 5/26 @ 7:31 am #
“Even though you walk through the valley of the shadow of Hicks, fear no hick, for O! is with you; His rod and his staff, may they comfort you, hick.”
Y’know thor, this part is a bit twisted…
If I didn’t know you to be a purveyor of ironic and sometimes acerbic witticism and clever plays on words, as well as a wolfish (in the most flattering sense, of course)p-hound, I might just wonder about all that O’s rod and staff being your comfort stuff..!
I’m sure though that it’s just another knee to the groin of all us God-bothering, hictard, rethugliKKKans, delivered in your own inimitable way…
Best Wishes
Pingback by The Death of Literary Studies [Dan Collins] on 5/26 @ 7:35 am #
[...] Darleen wrote about the dust-up over graduate student putz Sean Parrish’s typically stupid assertions [...]
Comment by Pablo on 5/26 @ 7:39 am #
How was jail, thor? Make any new friends?
Comment by JHoward on 5/26 @ 7:44 am #
A slick conveyance of self-contradiction.
Comment by serr8d on 5/26 @ 8:14 am #
Damn. One mention of that corpulent sackless schlemiel, and irrupt! forth it comes.
Learned anything from that fractured jaw, thor?
Comment by Rob Crawford on 5/26 @ 8:16 am #
Hopefully he learned to get the money up front.
Comment by Carin on 5/26 @ 8:21 am #
Not only am I now a “hick”, I’m also a redneck. Spent all weekend outside gardening and what not. The burn on my neck is somewhat painful, but on a positive note I finally got that thing out of my thumb. Took only a week. It was 3/4 and inch long.
Comment by sdferr on 5/26 @ 8:29 am #
Damn, that’s big as such things go. What kind of thing was it Carin, a splinter or a plant needle, or something else?
Comment by Asymmetric Polyhedron (formerly mojo) on 5/26 @ 8:35 am #
I always enjoy being derided (get it?) by Callow Youth©. It only stings if you take them as seriously as they do themselves. Me, I just laugh and light another cigar.
Comment by Bob Reed on 5/26 @ 8:37 am #
3/4 of in inch long?!?!?
Goodness girl, are sure that was a splinter, or did someone impale your thumb while you were unawares…
That sounds like a nail or something!
Best Wishes
Comment by Carin on 5/26 @ 8:56 am #
Alls I know, is that I was weeding, and something poked me. It hurt like the dickens, but I couldn’t find anything in there despite repeated digging sessions. By the time it came out, it had softened – so I couldn’t really tell what it was. It was a pokey thing.
Comment by Cowboy on 5/26 @ 9:01 am #
thor:
I haven’t been around in awhile, but have noticed your absence. How’s your father? I was thinking about him along with the veterans I know yesterday.
Comment by sdferr on 5/26 @ 9:04 am #
Since it softened we can pretty much rule out glass, metal or ceramic and rule in some sort of plant thingy. Anyhoos glad to hear it’s out finally.
Comment by happyfeet on 5/26 @ 9:16 am #
the muppets picture is priceless… what’s going on in Texas RTO? No one tells me anything… how is that playing?
Comment by N. O'Brain on 5/26 @ 10:12 am #
“#
Comment by Cowboy on 5/26 @ 9:01 am #
thor:
I haven’t been around in awhile, but have noticed your absence. How’s your father? I was thinking about him along with the veterans I know yesterday.”
Please ignore the ball-less wonder.
Thank you.
Comment by peter jackson on 5/26 @ 10:23 pm #
Oh Jesus. Are Parrish’s fifteen minutes over yet?
Comment by maggie katzen on 5/27 @ 12:55 am #
you are dead to me.
Pingback by Steynian 358 « Free Canuckistan! on 5/28 @ 10:36 am #
[...] REASON ISN’T JUST SLEEPING… the Left is bound and determined to beat it to death while it lay in bed …. [...]
Trackback by speeding lawyer Scotland on 7/19 @ 4:13 am #
speeding lawyer Scotland…
81% of the drivers we defend keep their licence. Can we help or share best practices and information?…