A NOTE ON SCHOLARSHIP

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
Bill Arnold

A NOTE ON SCHOLARSHIP

Legg inn av Bill Arnold » 24 nov 2007 05:59:02

Hi, Gen-Medievaliers :)

I wrote quite awhile ago, that in English Comp I taught that
most statements can be categorized as statements of fact,
inferences, or value judgments. Some Dim-Watts insist upon
confusing them, still, to this day. In gentleman and scholar
Nat Taylor's fine post about the BML Peck Pedigree he made
some statements of fact, you know, the stuff of genealogy,
dates, names, places. Then he drew some inferences, which
were his conclusions with which we can agree or disagree,
and I choose to in some cases agree and in some disagree.
Sometimes, conclusions can be more loosely termed opinions.
And lastly, he offered some value judgments, and actually
withdrew some earlier ones based on suppositions and now
modified by new facts at his disposal. As with his conclusions
or opinions about the facts, I choose to in some cases agree
and in some disagree with his value judgements. It is to his
credit as a gentleman and a scholar that he sought fit to offer
up some serious statements of fact other chose to ignore without
one shred of evidence.

Cheers,

Bill

*****


____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better pen pal.
Text or chat with friends inside Yahoo! Mail. See how. http://overview.mail.yahoo.com/

wjhonson

Re: A NOTE ON SCHOLARSHIP

Legg inn av wjhonson » 24 nov 2007 06:08:02

On Nov 23, 8:54 pm, Bill Arnold <billarnold...@yahoo.com> wrote:
I wrote quite awhile ago, that in English Comp I taught that
most statements can be categorized as statements of fact,
inferences, or value judgments.

In gentleman and scholar
Nat Taylor's fine post about the BML Peck Pedigree he made
some statements of fact, you know, the stuff of genealogy,
dates, names, places. Then he drew some inferences, which
were his conclusions with which we can agree or disagree,
and I choose to in some cases agree and in some disagree.
Sometimes, conclusions can be more loosely termed opinions.
And lastly, he offered some value judgments, and actually
withdrew some earlier ones based on suppositions and now
modified by new facts at his disposal.

-------------------------
Here we see Bill, the English Professor demonstrating his technique,
where he has a 500 post argument, *before* he finally defines for us,
that in his world, all utterences must be classified into three and
only three categories : statements of fact, inferences, and value
judgements.

So the entire argument thread was based on other people having *more*
than three categories. It's an old technique designed to engender a
long and vicious argument, which, at the end, can be signed off by
stating : "You didn't understand my point".

Caveat Lector
Will Johnson

D. Spencer Hines

Re: A NOTE ON SCHOLARSHIP

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 24 nov 2007 06:12:16

Yes...

Caveat Lector from his first post.

DSH

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

"wjhonson" <wjhonson@aol.com> wrote in message
news:ace458ff-dbbe-42d2-8467-09adc8bb91d0@a39g2000pre.googlegroups.com...

On Nov 23, 8:54 pm, Bill Arnold <billarnold...@yahoo.com> wrote:
I wrote quite awhile ago, that in English Comp I taught that
most statements can be categorized as statements of fact,
inferences, or value judgments.

In gentleman and scholar
Nat Taylor's fine post about the BML Peck Pedigree he made
some statements of fact, you know, the stuff of genealogy,
dates, names, places. Then he drew some inferences, which
were his conclusions with which we can agree or disagree,
and I choose to in some cases agree and in some disagree.
Sometimes, conclusions can be more loosely termed opinions.
And lastly, he offered some value judgments, and actually
withdrew some earlier ones based on suppositions and now
modified by new facts at his disposal.

-------------------------
Here we see Bill, the English Professor demonstrating his technique,
where he has a 500 post argument, *before* he finally defines for us,
that in his world, all utterences must be classified into three and
only three categories : statements of fact, inferences, and value
judgements.

So the entire argument thread was based on other people having *more*
than three categories. It's an old technique designed to engender a
long and vicious argument, which, at the end, can be signed off by
stating : "You didn't understand my point".

Caveat Lector
Will Johnson

Gjest

Re: A NOTE ON SCHOLARSHIP

Legg inn av Gjest » 24 nov 2007 07:18:02

On Nov 23, 8:54 pm, Bill Arnold <billarnold...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi, Gen-Medievaliers :)

I wrote quite awhile ago, that in English Comp I taught that
most statements can be categorized as statements of fact,
inferences, or value judgments.

And you lectured us that all statements of fact are fact unless
contradicted. And both, I now see, come from a tradition of
formalizing something that by its nature is free-form - true debate
and discussion. Not your high school debate society debate or
courtroom debate, or the artificially formalized writing that is
taught in English Comp classes (and useless outside of them), but
actual discussion and debate. It must be so frustrating, with a
perfect grid of square holes all lined out, each type of statement
having its category and its place in the scheme for the discussion.
But everyone else in the discussion insists on making round or
triangular or curlicue statements that just can't be made to fit into
the square holes. It must be so frustrating, them not following the
script. It must be their fault - they must not get it. They must be
dumb, because they don't follow the 'rules'.

Bill, "there is no spoon."

(I am sure there is a discussion list somewhere concerning English
composition. Perhaps they care what you you taught your class.)

taf

Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»