Grading: As presented by the End of the Semester

It's that time of the year, when I have to grade papers which are going to be (hopefully) more coherent than what we've been reading. I'll have a new update next week. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Environmentalism: Behold a Pale Horse pp. 215-216

A common trait amongst conspiracy theorists is that they like to brag that they know everything. They've seen the "TRUTH" and this sight has given them perfect knowledge. It does not matter that the knowledge they have will also run counter to other conspiracy theorists, requires a whole new reality, or is just plain bonkers. Conspiracy theorists have this trait of speaking with authority on every subject that comes across their mind.  Cooper, we may remember, was in the Navy and possibly the Air Force. He took some classes in radio but in every other respect, he's just a regular guy. Cooper gets a lot of credit from the UFOlogy circuit and the conspiracy crowd because he worked in Naval Intelligence, but to us--that means nothing. He claims an expertise in everything--but as we're about to see: he has very little understanding of the natural world especially.  In a symposium held in 1957...possibly the Bilderberg meeting that he alluded to last time, the JASON so...
Read more

Air: We Never Went to the Moon pp. 36-55

 One of the most annoying things about this book is that it’s divided into chapters that are too short for a single post but too long to do two at a time. This chapter is a bit different because it becomes photo heavy. “ Here is shown that NASA has created the evidence for their conviction.” Sentences like this drive me nuts, when my students try this kind of bullshit, I hit it with the red underline and a comment saying, “don’t do this.” There’s a much easier way to say this, “I will show evidence NASA faked the landing.” It’s much clearer. Instead, Kaysing tries to get profound and fails. The content of the words makes something profound not simply the construction. If you’re familiar with this conspiracy theory, then you are going to be familiar with what follows: “ The photographs presented here are in 4 groups showing the major areas of discrepancy. ” The shortness of this chapter makes sense because it’s not important what Kaysing is saying…not really. What matters is that he...
Read more

Women Troubles: Proofs of a Conspiracy...pp. 113-123

We ended last week with Robison's very long and circular fallacy of the appeal to false authority. To recap, he lauds Newton--as he should--but then claims that because Newton believed in god we all should too. In fact, all of the smart people in his time believed in god, so therefore...that belief is what made them smart. It's a long fallacy that is seeking to discredit Weishaupt on intellectual grounds because it looks like that is what he was doing. It's a sleight of hand trick that works in person, but when we read this kind of trick it is more confusing than anything else. As I wrote, and repeatedly said, "why are we talking about Laplace again?"  By this point in the work, we are aware that Robison does not like the Illuminati and he's laid out their case of Deism/atheism. In the 18th century that should be enough, so this roundabout tactic is unnecessary. It's especially redundant because Robison can trade on his name if he wants. It is the only rea...
Read more