Theos-Talk Archives (October 1997 Message tt00116)

In response to the recent challenges by Daniel C.  to John C., I
suggest that some kinds of alleged solicitations of discussion
serve in fact to squelch it.  Anyone who wishes to read my
lengthy response to Daniel's lengthier criticisms of two chapters
of the thirty-five in TMR can find both through David Lane's
website, http://weber.ucsd.edu/~dlane.  It's my final word about
all this to him.  As in the challenges to Crocker, readers will
find Caldwell in a relentlessly prosecutorial mode-- as in his
conversations with Lane more recently on other matters searchable
through DejaNews.  100% of his discourse appears to be
confronting, attacking, and demanding defenses from others with
whom he claims to want civil, rational discourse with but whom he
approaches with relentless hostility.  It's always the other
person's responsibility to justify him or herself to Daniel,
never the other way around.

Give and take? I tried that for a long time and never found my
interlocutor to be less than 100% accusing and prosecutorial in
tone.  It doesn't just squelch *me* from discussing the ideas in
my own work.  It dissuades *anyone* from doing so because whoever
tries will be in the line of fire for the same kinds of
accusations, challenges, confrontation, demands, etc.  we have
just seen directed at John.

My replies, on the other hand, will be found by readers to have a
rather different tone.