Defending Scholarship

Submitted by Wayne J. Levin (Canada), Feb 2, 2003 at 12:30

As others have suggested, you did well, Dr. Pipes, but could have been better. ... Not an easy job - but you do remarkably and I hope you'll forgive the armchair quarterbacking here. I'm solidly behind you.

We need a sound-bite, something very specific about the issue at hand. How's this?

Scholarship mandates that published views be freely challenged and debated.

Too many Middle East Studies professors are not prepared to face the scrutiny that academics in all fields MUST face. The principle purpose of academic journals is to provide a medium where scholars can express their views based on their research and allow others in their field the opportunity to scrutinize and criticize. That is both expected and legitimate.

They are no-doubt thin-skinned because they KNOW perfectly well that their "analysis" is motivated, selective and distorted. After all, they are not complete idiots.

Of course, not only do they denounce the critics, but in a broken-telephone manner, they also propogate falsehoods like Campus Watch is a blacklist a la McCarthy. There is no such list. Shame on Ms. Tremonti for not having done her research - I expect better from her.

From what I've learned from Campus Watch and other sources, it appears that these politicizing & indoctrinating Middle East Studies professors would defend their discovery of Cold Fusion - even if no one other than themselves could replicate it!

Keep up the good fight and thanks for helping so many others who are fighting along with you.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".