From James Crossley's Jesus in An Age of Terror, 36:"Note throughout that Ristau did not really condemn those involved -- at best the odd human error here and there -- and he apparently still believes that western powers are acting with only kindness in their hearts. But with the propaganda model in mind, this begs the question, if he concedes wrongdoings then why can he not bring himself to condemn the wrongdoers or post comments on his blog, especially as he is arguably the most explicitly political biblioblogger?
Out of curiousity, Mark, how would you respond if someone wrote,
ReplyDeleteThe question begs to be asked.
Such a sentence would be both semantically well formed and formally distinct from the logical fallacy.
Might be OK with that. What about you?
ReplyDeleteI just ripped the page out of the book. Of course, it was on loan from the Princeton University library, but I don't think they'll mind.
ReplyDeleteWell at least *I* know what I mean! Anyway it seems like I'm in good company... ;-)
ReplyDeleteOn the links/endnotes, that's a good idea. I've seen this before outside biblical studies. Of course this begs the question why that solution passaed me by.
Hang on, if we are all going to be geeky - and we are - I did qualify it with 'With the propaganda model in mind...'. Doesn't that count in my favour?
ReplyDeleteThere seem to be a few logical fallacies behind the question begging - Ristau himself, Western kindness and the propaganda model...
ReplyDelete