Proper names

I often hear from people who think I'm too nice toward certain LDS scholars. For example, some people wonder why I avoid the full names of people named Dan. 

A few years ago, I reached an agreement with certain LDS scholars (not including Dan) that I wouldn't use their full names in my blog posts because the back-and-forth comes up in google searches and could reflect on their careers. I agreed because I don't think a focus on individuals should be part of the discussion. Plus, I genuinely like, respect and admire most LDS scholars. 

I write about issues, facts, and arguments.

Dan, however, has long focused on ad hominem arguments. That's a last resort for those who cannot make rational, fact-based arguments. Not surprisingly, he repeatedly uses my name in his blog, preferring that over focusing on the issues. 

His favorite anonymous blog, to which he refers frequently, specializes in ad hominem, to the point where the blog itself uses my name in its title. 

In any legitimate academic field, such tactics would be rejected out of hand, but among LDS apologists, this is business as usual. 

This is among the reasons why LDS apologetics has earned its reputation for deplorable tactics, logical and factual fallacies, and overall absurdity. These apologists do more to drive people away from the Church than the critics do.

We can expect more of the same, of course. These apologists aren't about to change course after decades of doing this. 

Now you "know why" I focus on issues instead of people.

Dan outs himself, but not the way he says he does

Not surprisingly, Dan the Interpreter is upset again. But his complaint is baseless.

A week ago, Dan the Interpreter complained about anonymous posts:

"The cowardice and dishonesty manifest in such anonymous and baseless down-voting seems to me genuinely contemptible."

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeterson/2021/06/see-the-movie-that-enemies-of-the-church-dont-want-you-to-see.html

Yesterday, Dan cited his favorite anonymous blog!

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeterson/2021/06/in-which-im-outed-as-an-anti-mormon-who-is-guilty-of-priestcraft.html?utm_medium=email&utm_source=BRSS&utm_campaign=Latter-day+Saint&utm_content=366

Dan claims he's upset/offended because I said he was engaged in priestcraft or something.

First, I didn't accuse Dan of anything. I described a typical, generic academic. Whether the description applies to any individual depends on that individual, and I don't know or care about Dan's particular situation. That wasn't my point.

Second, it should be obvious to any reader that an academic who doesn't accept grants, who is not employed to conduct research and writing, and who doesn't accept honorariums, travel allowances, and book royalties is not engaged in priestcraft.

But I do remember a famous passage from Hamlet:

The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

Dan condemns cowardice and dishonesty

Recently on his Patheos blog titled Sic et Non, Dan the Interpreter complained about people who disliked his Witnesses movie. 

And yet, Dan strongly and frequently endorses anonymous blogs that parrot his party line. 

This makes sense because presumably Peter Pan is actually Dan's alter ego.