On Mar 25, 2011, at 11:44 AM, lbo83235 wrote:
> I get that these are important questions in certain contexts and at certain junctures, but this seems unnecessarily (and, I feel like I should say, fairly characteristically) testy. Possibly also a bit parochial, in that typically American way that some of Carrol's recent posts have also unfortunately displayed. (And I hasten to add that Carrol is without question the person on this list from whom I have learned the most, despite fairly regular annoyance with his positively hemorrhoidal jeremiads.)
>
> I actually drafted a longish, substantive response on the creds / vouching / representativity issue(s), but on reflection I think I won't disrespect myself or the people involved by taking that bait. There's enough information available, easily enough, if you care to know.
In other words, you send out a piece with the rather broad headline "Egyptian socialists reject..." without determining exactly who these people are, or how representative of Egyptian socialists, much less the Egyptian population, they are? And then when queried you say it doesn't matter? Or, maybe, find out for yourself?
If dogmatism is something to be learned, you're doing a very good job - but you are studying under a master.
Doug