beastie wrote:Dr. Peterson's latest contribution to the thread in question:Over on a board that appears to be largely dedicated to obsessive-compulsive derision of this board and where accurate reading seems to be in short supply, there has been some cackling about my purportedly miraculous ability, in this thread, to comment negatively on Richard Dawkins's book without yet having read it. Of course, I've made precisely no comments directly about Dawkins's book. I simply called attention to a review of Dawkins by Alvin Plantinga, and summarily mentioned one or two of Plantinga's arguments.
I much prefer it when people respond to what I've written rather than to what they imagine me to have written. Unfortunately, that's surprisingly rare -- and particularly so on the board where these folks are making their remarks. (I'll pass over in charitable silence their latest conspiratorial speculations about me.)
Isn't this kinda like Peter, James, and John? They visit us, take note of our activities, most of us don't even know they're here at all, leave no evidence of their presence, then return from whence they've come and report on our activities? Feels kinda creepy, for a guy who has repeatedly expressed disdain and disinterest in us and this board.
For a guy who refuses to post here, Daniel sure feels the need to comment about our comments. And in the process, shows his obvious self-absorbion.
Daniel.. hon, sweet thing, dahlink... read my lips: it's not always about you. Sometimes (like this time), it's about someone else (The Dude, specifically). Try to understand. We love you, really we do, but sometimes we like to talk about other people too! It's not a reflection on you. And we aren't taking anything away from your world-renown-ness just because we want to talk about The Dude for a change. So quit trying to make it all about you, for pete's sake, and try to curb your natural inclination to be on stage. I promise we'll get back to you soon. Really, we will.