Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="EWC3, post: 3020452, member: 93416"]Thanks Doug. That seems accurate. Of course, Oxford Prof Howgego called Crawford's position "untenable" and cites Prof Lo Cascio and Dr Burnett as taking similar positions - so the "crackpot" jibe rebounds on those who make it. But how did the situation come about? Here in the UK I feel I was taught to think critically at school in the 1960's. Things were rather the opposite for my children by the 1990's. And look at the situation with Moses Finley. In the 1950's his views were considered so obnoxious in the USA that he was banned from teaching. Yet, much along the lines you say, later his positions were venerated, he was almost beatified in the late 20th century. Personally I find both positions wrong, both the banning and the beatification. Actually, since I personally think he was both wrong and not straightforward, I find the beatification even more troubling than the banning. It seems we must study the present to understand the past, but also, we must study the past to understand the present. So forever we try to pick ourselves up by our own bootstraps. Much easier to just believe the teacher of course   <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie3" alt=":(" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /> Rob[/QUOTE]