A says X. What a W!
Mar. 8th, 2011 01:24 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ciphergothThis is not at all meant as an argument against robustly disagreeing with public people - I think that's very often a good thing - but:
It seems to me that when you criticize public intellectual A for arguing X, you implicitly criticize all those who argue X. If I say that Ray Comfort is an idiot for arguing that the shape of bananas demonstrates the existence of God, I'm not saying that all theists are idiots, but I *am* saying that anyone who similarly argues that the shape of bananas demonstrates the existence of God is being idiotic.
I'd go further and say that this is a key role of debate among public intellectuals, that often we attack a particular published position not just because we disagree with the individual but because we want a response for all those who share their position.
Am I mistaken?
It seems to me that when you criticize public intellectual A for arguing X, you implicitly criticize all those who argue X. If I say that Ray Comfort is an idiot for arguing that the shape of bananas demonstrates the existence of God, I'm not saying that all theists are idiots, but I *am* saying that anyone who similarly argues that the shape of bananas demonstrates the existence of God is being idiotic.
I'd go further and say that this is a key role of debate among public intellectuals, that often we attack a particular published position not just because we disagree with the individual but because we want a response for all those who share their position.
Am I mistaken?
