The one theology book all atheists really should read

Discussion in 'Religion' started by Musika, Aug 19, 2018.

  1. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    26,931
    You are now confusing professional feedback with peer review.
    Scientific papers often have editors - especially the published ones. That is not their peer review.
    Peer review need unpack nothing. It would assess the attempt at communication, from a position of familiarity with success and failure in that endeavor.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Musika Last in Space Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,919
    Precisely my point.

    Precisely my point.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,257
    Only if your point is that black is white.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Musika Last in Space Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,919
    If one can talk about not unpacking a claim by talking about unpacking it and not distinguishing between editorship and peer reviewing by distinguishing between editorship and peer reviewing, I would think one would not be a stranger to such feats of optical acrobatics.
     
  8. Jeeves Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,940
    Do you know the meaning of any of the words you use?
     
  9. Musika Last in Space Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,919
    I would agree that there are certain persons plumbing the depths of semantics in their desperation to find something to disagree about.
     
  10. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    26,931
    You were confusing editing with peer review. I helped you untangle yourself, and recognize that peer review of a cartoon and editing of a cartoon would be done by peer reviewers and editors, respectively.
    Precisely the opposite of your point.
    This was your point:
    You were confused about what peer review is - for some reason you thought peer reviewers would be "unpacking" things and the like, and so peer review of a cartoonist's output would be absurd. That is a basic misunderstanding of peer review.
    And so there is no absurdity such as you claimed to be "therein".
     
  11. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,345
    Well it is true that peer review is a quality check that is carried out by peers where an editor cannot be expected to have the expertise to do it himself. In the case of a newspaper cartoon the editor will do it, indeed. But there is nothing silly in the idea of cartoonists reviewing cartoons, say for an annual prize for the best newspaper cartoon of the year, or something like that. Indeed peer review is exactly what is done by the panels that award book prizes.
     
  12. Musika Last in Space Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,919
    The silliness lies in the notion of peer reviewing unlocking some integral aspect of comic strip artistry (like it does in science) ... which is an exact type of silliness that puts it on par with extracting authoratative commentaries for comic strips as some precursor to comprehension.

    www.sciforums.com/threads/the-one-theology-book-all-atheists-really-should-read.161124/page-9#post-3538270
     
  13. Musika Last in Space Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,919
    .... speaking of the plumber ...
     
  14. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,345
    Well yes but that is your notion, not anyone else's.

    I reiterate, peer review is just a quality check, carried by fellow professionals.
     
  15. Musika Last in Space Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,919
    Unless you go running off to seek professional advice every time you encounter the Sunday funnies, it's your notion also.

    Which, in turn, explains its necessity in scientific disciplines and its incidental nature in the comic strip industry.
     
  16. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,345
    No, you have misunderstood me.

    The notion that I agree with you is silly is "the notion of peer reviewing unlocking some integral aspect of comic strip artistry"

    But that notion is your own Aunt Sally, created for the purpose of ridicule. I have been trying to point out that peer review need not necessarily involve any "unlocking" or anything so grandiose. It can be applied to selection of works for a prize in cartoons, journalism or books, for instance.
     
  17. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    26,931
    No such "notion" as you describe is involved, in science or anywhere. Therefore, no such silliness.
    Dealing with a clogged pipe.

    This is actually relevant, but to another thread - the topic of what is wrong, mentally, with these Abrahamic theists who wander into science forums and spread this silly garbage is now better informed. Someone who has this muddled a notion of peer review clearly misunderstands science at a very basic level - when they talk about science, they're talking about something quite different from what the scientists are doing and talking about.
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2018
  18. Musika Last in Space Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,919
    Then you have the wrong words in mind. If one can drive a distinction between "peer reviewing" and "getting a review by one's peers", it's obvious you are choosing to ignore the very specific focus that peer reviewing brings to bear.
    To say the least, if I tried to float some scientific claim as being "peer reviewed" on the strength of "some peers of the advocate reviewing the claim", I'm pretty sure you would be one of the first to kick up a stink.
     
  19. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,345
    One of the reasons for trusting established scientific journals is the quality of the reviewers they use, certainly.
     
  20. Jeeves Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,940
    So, tht's a resounding No then. Just checking.
     
  21. Musika Last in Space Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,919
    If you expect to locate the winners of the national society of cartoonists awards on a peer review data base, then sure, it must strike you as a resounding "no".
     
  22. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,257
    Nobody is talking about that but you.
     
  23. Musika Last in Space Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,919
    The evidence suggests otherwise.
     

Share This Page