Cain
Straussian
From the second link provided by Demon:
QED
QED
Alan Dershowitz, Plagiarist
- Thread starter Cain
- Start date
davefoc
Philosopher
I didn't see why Finkelstein should have had to buy an ad to run his comparison of Dershowitz's and Peters' writings. It seemed relevant enough to an important issue that the paper should have just run it and allowed Dershowitz some room for a response. It sounds like protecting one of their own is a more important goal to the editors of the Harvard Crimson than promoting serious intellectual debate on important topics.
Right now it looks like Dershowitz is winning the puplic debate. He says he just ran some quotes that appeared in Peters book, he or somebody working for him verified the quotes based on original sources and nobody is saying that the quotes are wrong so what's really going on is that his detractors can't attack him on substance so they are just making up this issue.
The argument has got some flaws but they are subtle and not likely to be appreciated by somebody just listening to the headlines of a public debate.
Part of the reason that Dershowitz is winning the public debate is Finkelstein's approach. The average person doesn't know that Peter's book has been discredited. A lot of pro Israeli people wouldn't believe it anyway. So accusing Dershowitz of basing some of his book on the scholarship of the Peters book is just not going to be seen as such a bad thing by a lot of the public that has an interest in this debate.
If Finkelstein wants to change the public perception of this issue at all, I think he needs to use more of his 15 minutes of fame to focus on the substance of what Dershowitz said and less on the plagiarism angle.
Right now it looks like Dershowitz is winning the puplic debate. He says he just ran some quotes that appeared in Peters book, he or somebody working for him verified the quotes based on original sources and nobody is saying that the quotes are wrong so what's really going on is that his detractors can't attack him on substance so they are just making up this issue.
The argument has got some flaws but they are subtle and not likely to be appreciated by somebody just listening to the headlines of a public debate.
Part of the reason that Dershowitz is winning the public debate is Finkelstein's approach. The average person doesn't know that Peter's book has been discredited. A lot of pro Israeli people wouldn't believe it anyway. So accusing Dershowitz of basing some of his book on the scholarship of the Peters book is just not going to be seen as such a bad thing by a lot of the public that has an interest in this debate.
If Finkelstein wants to change the public perception of this issue at all, I think he needs to use more of his 15 minutes of fame to focus on the substance of what Dershowitz said and less on the plagiarism angle.
Charlie Monoxide
Wag
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2003
- Messages
- 2,760
I just started reading Dershowitz's "Contrary to Popular Opinion". As of page 50, it's a pretty good read so far. Mainly very short (page, page and a half) blurbs on various American legal issues. Whether he plagurized or not, he's an entertaining writer.
Charlie (it was OJ's first offense) Monoxide
Charlie (it was OJ's first offense) Monoxide
Dershowitz rests his case.
Without having responded to ANY of the specific charges, he concludes: "I will no longer dignify false and empty charges leveled by these serial fabricators. I rest my case."
What a clown. I guess there won't be a public debate at Harvard, then? And forget about the 10 000 dollars.
http://www.thecrimson.com/today/article349122.html
Without having responded to ANY of the specific charges, he concludes: "I will no longer dignify false and empty charges leveled by these serial fabricators. I rest my case."
What a clown. I guess there won't be a public debate at Harvard, then? And forget about the 10 000 dollars.
http://www.thecrimson.com/today/article349122.html
davefoc
Philosopher
I don't like Dershowitz. One of the things I really don't like about Dershowitz is that he never has a public introspective moment. He uses his skills at argument to relentlessly push forward his agenda without ever pausing to consider the truth in opposing views.
This is a perfect example, and it looks like Finkelstein was an easy mark.
Finkelstein could have calmly pointed out that the source of some of Dershowitz's argument and research was a largely discredited book. He could have talked about the obvious paraphrasing of Peters book. He could have criticized the substance of what Dershowitz was saying.
Instead he chose to blast away with accusations of plagiarism and provided Dershowitz an opportunity to play his stupid game. Now Finkelstein is losing the game. Not because his views are wrong, not because his scholarship is poor, but because he chose to call names and Dershowitz has succeeded in making him look petty and unscholarly. If Finkelstein doesn't figure this out he is going to continue to be unable to persuade anybody that doesn't agree with him already.
This is a perfect example, and it looks like Finkelstein was an easy mark.
Finkelstein could have calmly pointed out that the source of some of Dershowitz's argument and research was a largely discredited book. He could have talked about the obvious paraphrasing of Peters book. He could have criticized the substance of what Dershowitz was saying.
Instead he chose to blast away with accusations of plagiarism and provided Dershowitz an opportunity to play his stupid game. Now Finkelstein is losing the game. Not because his views are wrong, not because his scholarship is poor, but because he chose to call names and Dershowitz has succeeded in making him look petty and unscholarly. If Finkelstein doesn't figure this out he is going to continue to be unable to persuade anybody that doesn't agree with him already.