[Milton-L] Re: wow even more attacks via detail crazy glue

James Rovira jamesrovira at gmail.com
Fri Dec 17 14:04:36 EST 2010


No... there's no personal attack in my response below.  I don't attribute to
you any characteristics other than a lack of awareness of how your claims
are coming across to other readers, with an explanation of why they are
coming across that way.  I don't accuse you of being petty or stupid.  I've
also responded with a request for documentation for some of your claims.

The problem with this discussion on your end is that you're being
insufficiently precise in your claims, even with the additional
clarification that you provide below.  I don't know who these orthodox
Christians are who would take issue with Milton's PL if they'd only read the
Bible carefully and then read PL.  I don't know that either the Bible or PL
could be read so narrowly as to be made absolutely contradictory on every
fundamental point by most readers. I have met some fundamentalist Christians
who could perform this task, but they represent a minority of Christians.

I am curious what a reading like that would look like and would like to see
it spelled out clearly and in some detail.

The problem with this discussion on my end is that I'm grading Freshman
papers.  Up to this point, I would rather respond to your posts than read
any more freshman papers.   But it also means I'm reading your posts like
I'd read a Freshman paper.  I appreciate that you're attempting to argue a
provocative thesis.  I also  get the impression that your own thesis is
unclear even to you, as is the evidence supporting it, if you have any
well-defined evidence.    I also think that your language is carelessly
chosen, obscuring your thesis.

I'd give you something in the C range if you supported your claims by
quoting PL and then quoting Christian responses to PL to give some substance
to your imagined, offended orthodox believer.  Right now, you're getting a
D.  If you do stick to your 24 hr reprieve from this discussion or refuse to
further respond to me, I will not be joyous at all.  I will have to stop
this idiotic banter and get back to grading freshman papers.  I -might- be a
little angry with you for that, but the paper I just finished grading
was...good.  This student has improved.  So after I eat a bit of cheese,
pour some tea, and check email three more times I'll grade another paper,
after which I'll probably take a shower and do dishes before grading another
paper.  I can only hope that by that time you've responded... before I have
to grade another paper.

It's not every day I get to meet a contemporary incarnation of Ion.

Jim R

On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 1:19 PM, Nairba Sirrah <nairbasirrah at msn.com> wrote:

>  Mr. Rovia...and everyone else...would you please mind backing off the
> personal attack?
>
> My "even slightly" comment was in regard to Milton's main rhetorical theme,
> justifying "the ways of God to men." I wasn't talking about the obvious
> character names and locale. I meant the central narrative. Jesus existing
> before Jesus was born. Jesus speaking God's sentences from Genesis, etc.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.richmond.edu/pipermail/milton-l/attachments/20101217/acacf4b1/attachment.html


More information about the Milton-L mailing list