tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post8559777830922701952..comments2024-03-28T10:44:30.518-06:00Comments on American Creation: American Atonement: Part 1Brad Harthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17669677047039491864noreply@blogger.comBlogger17125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-6695759046853016212009-04-16T13:11:00.000-06:002009-04-16T13:11:00.000-06:00Sure, who needs facts when you have your opinions?...Sure, who needs facts when you have your opinions?Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-79238892058371050852009-04-16T06:15:00.000-06:002009-04-16T06:15:00.000-06:00.
"...that is not only moronic, it's without a shr....<br /><I>"...that is not only moronic, it's without a shred of proof or even argument."</I>.<br />It is an hypothecation and there is more than enough evidence to give it support.<br />.<br />My comments do not constitute a claim to scholarly study; but, are merely comments. As such they need little more than to be expressed. If you want to question them, that's your prerogative; but, to call it "moronic" and to claim my comments are "nonsense" amounts to nothing less than cheap insult.<br /><br />It seems obvious, to me, that you want to be seen as an insider member of a circle of scholarly types. These simple-minded antics of yours are little more than attempts to draw a line around that circle.<br /><br />I never claimed to be an historical scholar; but, I sure do like learning about history and especially American history. Since I've come here, several authors have come to my attention--I've purchased many and have or am reading them.<br /><br />I'm learning. I am not and do not claim to be a scholar. I have opinions and I recognize honest endeavor. You seem to be quite dishonest to me, Mr. Dyike.<br /><br />The proof is in the pudding, wise guy, and it is that you are trying to show yourself as being someone of special standing in the world of historical scholars.<br /><br />But, you're just like everyone else--common in history.<br /><br />Now settle down and stick to the purpose of this blog spot and stop being such a bore..<br />.<br />You are doing a great disservice to Hart's paper. He didn't publish it to get your flack.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756814849309388483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-82445122747161410162009-04-15T15:14:00.000-06:002009-04-15T15:14:00.000-06:00I don't have an animus except against nonsense. W...I don't have an animus except against nonsense. When you write<br /><br />"<br />We are experiencing societal dysfunction brought on us by combined religious and economic forces in their effort to take political control of our government."<br /><br />that is not only moronic, it's without a shred of proof or even argument. Blaming our contemporary problems on the Religious Right? As if the Religious Right has any influence atall on Wall St.?<br /><br />Your problem with me is I actually read the crap you try to slip in.Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-65032534492344984142009-04-15T14:14:00.000-06:002009-04-15T14:14:00.000-06:00.
It's an old, old story, Thomas.
.
Far back into ....<br />It's an old, old story, Thomas.<br />.<br />Far back into history, it was the landed aristocracy always had the greatest influence of what was preached from any pulpits. <br />.<br />And, if you know anything about how churches work today, you would know that where the wealthiest members of the congregation don't like what is being preached from the pulpit, one or the other has to go.<br />.<br />Quite often, the preacher changes his tune.<br />.<br />The <B>Family</B> is under attack, <B>Education</B> is under attack, and <B>Government</B> is under attack. Who is it that attacks them except the combo of the <B>Economic and Religious</B> institutions of our society? The Religious is being upheld and the Economic is being upheld. Give it some thought. These five are the basic institutions of our American society.<br /> <br />But, we are made ignorant of this fact in post-modernist (aka post-structuralist) times.<br />.<br />I think it is YOUR animus that shows most of all.<br />.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756814849309388483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-75123671272694087212009-04-15T13:30:00.000-06:002009-04-15T13:30:00.000-06:00We are experiencing societal dysfunction brought o...<I>We are experiencing societal dysfunction brought on us by combined religious and economic forces in their effort to take political control of our government.</I>Nonsense. If that were true, Pat Robertson would have been elected president or at least won the nomination. Your animus is showing, Phil.Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-36124180989474961202009-04-15T07:10:00.000-06:002009-04-15T07:10:00.000-06:00.
So far, an excellent approach to the problem.
.
....<br />So far, an excellent approach to the problem.<br />.<br />I would have come at this from another perspective of how religious leaders combined forces with economic leaders to form the so-called <I>Christian Nation</I> movement in the first place. Brad touches on it.<br />.<br />The Imagined Community is, of course, another term for sociology's Normative Group. <br />.<br />And, it all gets into conspiracy theories about how certain forces want to change the course of history.<br />.<br />We are experiencing societal dysfunction brought on us by combined religious and economic forces in their effort to take political control of our government. <br />.<br />Plain and simple--its a strategy.<br />.<br />Why should our time be any different from other historical periods when such forces ran their gambits?Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756814849309388483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-48434130592043204182009-04-14T12:10:00.000-06:002009-04-14T12:10:00.000-06:00Riffing off of JRB, let me add that I believe you ...Riffing off of JRB, let me add that I believe you need a layer between your thesis and your evidence, namely your reasoning. Let me give a simple example (much simpler than your thesis, yet very difficult to defend):<br /><br />Thesis: World War 2 began in 1939.<br /><br />1st layer of breakdown: (a) WW2 was not yet underway on 1/1/1939; (b) WW2 was underway on 12/31/1939.<br /><br />I think you would agree that if (a) and (b) could both be established, the thesis would be established. That is my attempt at an illustration of valid reasoning.<br /><br />But establishing (a) and (b) is no easy task; it requires a good definition of WW2, showing that the Japanese campaigns on the mainland in 1937-38 do not satisfy the definition, and that various other campaigns (e.g. direct American involvement, or the invasion of the Soviet Union by Germany) are not necessary for WW2, etc. In practice, both (a) and (b) need their own breakdown into further supporting propositions.<br /><br />Sooner or later, if successful, you will have reached the level of propositions like "Germany invaded Poland in 1939", which can be taken as accepted by the relevant audience, or else directly supported by evidence. Such propositions that do not require further breakdown are your premises.Kristo Miettinenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11915769006991993189noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-50181909232286202802009-04-14T12:01:00.000-06:002009-04-14T12:01:00.000-06:00Thanks, Jimmyray! I really appreciate the comment...Thanks, Jimmyray! I really appreciate the comments, and I think you are probably right. I do need to clarify a few things. Thanks for taking the time. I really do appreciate it.Brad Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17669677047039491864noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-64044429955703533392009-04-14T11:00:00.000-06:002009-04-14T11:00:00.000-06:00Brad,
Kristo's comments are almost identical to m...Brad,<br /><br />Kristo's comments are almost identical to mine when you first posted on this. I certainly come from a different "theistic" point of view and I'm a bonefide Barton 'not liker and liar caller' to boot. Also, I didn't/am not yet commenting on the content.<br /><br />I think that maybe an abstract prior to Section I or the introduction would help. I think that it should contain a no frills statement of the thesis and should also contain a statement of how you intend to defend (or have defended) the thesis. And then a statement of how you did - a brief presentation of the conclusion or conclusions of the work. Kind of like a "I came, I saw, I conquered" statement. Or as I was taught, tell em up front what you're gonna tell em, then tell em, and then tell em what ya told em. All very concisely and matter of factly presented.<br /><br />I'm not sure what the scholarly work product in your field looks like at the level you're writing but when I did my MS thesis I did something of a hybrid of plain thesis writing and journal writing (plenty examples of each available) since publication was on the immediate horizon. <br /><br />Not to write for you but I might do an abstract like...<br /><br /><I>Originally conceived out of the surge of Christian Conservatism in the 1960s and 1970s,</I> [a] <I>“Christian Nation” movement has evolved to encompass the majority of</I> [today's] <I>devout American Evangelicals, who, as a result of their religious and political devotion, have used the “Christian America” argument to create a new form of American Nationalism, or as Benedict Anderson would call it, an imagined community:</I>Add definition<br /><br />Then: I will show that the evidence ... <br /> <br />or <br /><br />The evidence that I present clearly demonstrates this to be absolutely true/strongly supported/substantially supported but......, not supported, needs more work, I thought this would work but I really need to wrap this up and get my degree, etc. <br /><br />Possibly followed by recommendations for additional work that could help clarify of expand the subject matter (lay the ground work for your next two books - following the first based on your thesis - here). <br /><br />I hope this helps some. Of course when you are published I will sit around the pub waxing on about "I knew him when..."jimmiraybobnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-49254533956248940272009-04-14T07:40:00.000-06:002009-04-14T07:40:00.000-06:00OK, this is (kind of) what I thought might be your...OK, this is (kind of) what I thought might be your thesis, but I didn't want to put words in your mouth, since I see that claim as simply put out there, but not supported.<br /><br />So, now that we know your thesis, what is your argument?<br /><br />In other words, from what premises, and by what reasoning, do you infer the truth of your thesis, and expect us to do likewise?Kristo Miettinenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11915769006991993189noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-65119963457295347232009-04-14T07:33:00.000-06:002009-04-14T07:33:00.000-06:00Originally conceived out of the surge of Christian...<EM>Originally conceived out of the surge of Christian Conservatism in the 1960s and 1970s, this “Christian Nation” movement has evolved to encompass the majority of devout American Evangelicals, who, as a result of their religious and political devotion, have used the “Christian America” argument to create a new form of American Nationalism, or as Benedict Anderson would call it, an imagined community.</EM>This is my thesis. I would appreciate knowing where you (or anyone else for that matter) think I could make this clearer.Brad Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17669677047039491864noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-73757566309846802792009-04-14T05:46:00.000-06:002009-04-14T05:46:00.000-06:00No, no, no, Brad.
If your thesis is not presented...No, no, no, Brad.<br /><br />If your thesis is not presented in your paper then you have none. It's got to be yours.<br /><br />My objection is not to your content (yet) but to your structure. You have no specific claim that you are defending, only a series of claims that you are advancing unsupported.<br /><br />If you will accept a courtroom analogy, you are not presenting the prosecutors' case, you are presenting the idictment only.Kristo Miettinenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11915769006991993189noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-53078888853088131702009-04-14T01:47:00.000-06:002009-04-14T01:47:00.000-06:00No surprise to see that supporters of the Christia...<I>No surprise to see that supporters of the Christian Nation are coming out to protect their "imagined community."</I>Hehe, Lindsey. Nice. For my part in this, take it up with Harry Truman. After people get done calling each other liars, whatever remains might just be the truth. We do an OK job around here sometimes looking for it together.<br /><br />Me, I'm not part of any community I know of. Of all the "imagined communities" I've seen operating around here---and there's more than one and more than two, don't fool yrself, Lindsey---not a one will have me. Which is cool.Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-47339788858053334182009-04-13T21:19:00.000-06:002009-04-13T21:19:00.000-06:00Sounds pretty solid to me. I like the angle you a...Sounds pretty solid to me. I like the angle you are taking. If nothing else, it's unique. <br /><br />No surprise to see that supporters of the Christian Nation are coming out to protect their "imagined community."Lindsey Shumanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13536959819608584779noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-40005566115655111322009-04-13T19:44:00.000-06:002009-04-13T19:44:00.000-06:00Kristo:
Thank you for your candor. Have you read...Kristo:<br /><br />Thank you for your candor. Have you read Anderson's "Imagined Communities?" That might be the starting point for understanding my thesis.Brad Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17669677047039491864noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-67030299090968023032009-04-13T18:22:00.000-06:002009-04-13T18:22:00.000-06:00Hi Brad!
So what's the thesis of your paper? Wha...Hi Brad!<br /><br />So what's the thesis of your paper? What is the takeaway point, of which you want to leave your reader persuaded that you have shown it by valid deduction from premises supported by evidence?<br /><br />To me, this reads like a NYT op-ed, not a grad paper...Kristo Miettinenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11915769006991993189noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-22912506929956227672009-04-13T15:18:00.000-06:002009-04-13T15:18:00.000-06:00"I don't think we put enough stress on the necessi..."I don't think we put enough stress on the necessity of implanting in the child's mind the moral code under which we live.<BR/><BR/> The fundamental basis of this Nation's law was given to Moses on the Mount. The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings which we get from Exodus and St. Matthew, from Isaiah and St. Paul. I don't think we emphasize that enough these days.<BR/><BR/> If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state."<BR/><BR/><BR/>---Harry S. Truman, Christian Nationist [1950]<BR/><BR/>http://trumanlibrary.org/publicpapers/viewpapers.php?pid=657Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.com