Virulent anti-Catholicism of 1837

[dianaiad]

This is the Net debate. There are no experts here, unless they are well-known experts.
Self-proclaimed expertise is irrelevant.

I see.

then I should completely discount the fact that you wrote a paper on “Twelve Angry Men?”

Personally, I believe that you did, and that it makes you more knowledgeable about that film than people who have not had to write a paper on it.

…or didn’t you notice that my post, above, was in YOUR defense?

See, the thing is, if you (general ‘you,’ not specific ‘you’) claim degrees and expertise that you don’t have, someone somewhere who actually HAS those degrees (or written those papers) will chime in and correct you.

When that happens, you are stuck; no matter how much time passes, your words are archived and people can and will find them to wave them under your nose, or kick you in the butt with them–to discredit you.

Those who have been around awhile tend to be aware of this, and therefore—don’t generally fib. So if you tell me that you wrote a paper on a movie, then I believe that you wrote that paper. You are bright enough to understand the consequences of lying about something like that, and you are FAR too smart to actually do it.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

Yes, He did. My reluctance to see the movie has nothing to do with my religious beliefs (wait, I said that already…guess you missed it.)

It has everything to do with Mel Gibson’s film making style. I can handle it when the story is fiction; chalk it up to incredible special effects. However, Christ’s death on the cross was very, very REAL.

I watched my husband die of cancer. Took him a year and a half of suffering–nine months of it completely unable to eat or drink so much as a sip of water. I watched firemen get three of my children out of a car with the ‘jaws of life’ and cart them off to the hospital, where I was literally running from room to room, from compound fractures to bruised lungs to concussions to broken jaws to…you name it…stopping just long enough to go home and see my husband who was dying at the time.

I have seen enough, thank you. I don’t need the movie to appreciate the pain and suffering He went through. I don’t need to have it artificially portrayed in order to understand the sacrifice He gave.

Nor am I the only one who feels this way. Many others do as well, including Catholics. I have nothing against Gibson’s honest attempt to portray His suffering in a way that wrings hearts and souls; he needed to do it, and others need to see it.

I’m simply not one of them.

I loved The Passion of Christ. For one thing it was filmed in the Aramaic language so it seemed very real. A lot of it was based on the visions of a German nun (with stimata) named Anne Catherine Emmerich (1774–1824) called The Dolorous Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ. You might like it because it shows Jesus’s sufferings in the Garden of Gethsamane. ( Although it also does show a very vivid crucifixion.) It’s awesome though – I didn’t think I could watch it but I’m glad I did. Made me cry a lot.

 

[Louie1983]

I loved The Passion of Christ. For one thing it was filmed in the Aramaic language so it seemed very real. A lot of it was based on the visions of a German nun (with stimata) named Anne Catherine Emmerich (1774–1824) called The Dolorous Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ. You might like it because it shows Jesus’s sufferings in the Garden of Gethsamane. ( Although it also does show a very vivid crucifixion.) It’s awesome though – I didn’t think I could watch it but I’m glad I did. Made me cry a lot.

I can confidently say that i have watched it dozens of times, i can’t get enough of it. It’s a good way to meditate on the sorrowfull mysteries when i say the rosary!

 

[RebeccaJ]

I see.

Hi diana, just thought I’d note that you are talking to kalt, not me.

 

[RebeccaJ]

For the record: I believe experience matters. I am the daughter of a man who never graduated from high school, yet, he successfully ran his own business. I would say his experience made him an expert in his field.

I have experience in the media business, but no I would not say that is my expertise. I know people who are light years beyond anything I know. But I would also say my experience is more than a person who goes to a movie once a week for entertainment purposes. My expertise is technology. I am dang good at what I do.

As for writing papers, in school, this is where I do well. Any professor I have had that requires writing tells me I write well. But I am not a writer. Give me those fill in the blank tests and my brain shuts off. In fact, I had this dream once (nightmare) that Salvation was a fill-in-the-blank test. I was sitting in a class room and I just knew I was going to hell because I cannot for the life of me do well on these types of test. Same for homework that is worksheets. TORTURE, is what that is. In my dream, the test was passed out and all the blanks were filled in with the right answer, and the answer was circled as well. Phew! Is all I can say.

Diana gave her experience of suffering. She’s filled in the blanks and feels no need to have that sort of “test”. I understand. Life changes us and who knows, maybe life will change again and she’ll have this desire to watch a film. I don’t believe, in the scheme of things, watching any film really matters. I mean, in terms of Salvation.

Experience matters, it is how our faith grows. It is how we come to know God better and better every day. Our very faith is based on the experiences of those we read of in the Bible, and most all, the experiences of a Person. Jesus Christ. My faith is based on my experiences, my encounters with God. My desire to look Jesus in the face, every day. I think it is a huge mistake to discount experience.

 

[dianaiad]

Hi diana, just thought I’d note that you are talking to kalt, not me.

You are quite right. Please put it down to end-of-the-school-year brain fog.

 

[dianaiad]

For the record: I believe experience matters. I am the daughter of a man who never graduated from high school, yet, he successfully ran his own business. I would say his experience made him an expert in his field.

Hence “degrees and expertise”

I have experience in the media business, but no I would not say that is my expertise. I know people who are light years beyond anything I know. But I would also say my experience is more than a person who goes to a movie once a week for entertainment purposes. My expertise is technology. I am dang good at what I do.

I absolutely believe that.

As for writing papers, in school, this is where I do well. Any professor I have had that requires writing tells me I write well. But I am not a writer. Give me those fill in the blank tests and my brain shuts off. In fact, I had this dream once (nightmare) that Salvation was a fill-in-the-blank test. I was sitting in a class room and I just knew I was going to hell because I cannot for the life of me do well on these types of test. Same for homework that is worksheets. TORTURE, is what that is. In my dream, the test was passed out and all the blanks were filled in with the right answer, and the answer was circled as well. Phew! Is all I can say.

Now THAT’S a dream with meaning…and I’m not saying that facetiously! If I were to have that dream, Salvation would have been an oral exam…and Someone else would be answering the questions for me.

Diana gave her experience of suffering. She’s filled in the blanks and feels no need to have that sort of “test”. I understand. Life changes us and who knows, maybe life will change again and she’ll have this desire to watch a film. I don’t believe, in the scheme of things, watching any film really matters. I mean, in terms of Salvation.

Experience matters, it is how our faith grows. It is how we come to know God better and better every day. Our very faith is based on the experiences of those we read of in the Bible, and most all, the experiences of a Person. Jesus Christ. My faith is based on my experiences, my encounters with God. My desire to look Jesus in the face, every day. I think it is a huge mistake to discount experience.

 

[kalt]

I see.

then I should completely discount the fact that you wrote a paper on “Twelve Angry Men?”

Personally, I believe that you did, and that it makes you more knowledgeable about that film than people who have not had to write a paper on it.

…or didn’t you notice that my post, above, was in YOUR defense?

See, the thing is, if you (general ‘you,’ not specific ‘you’) claim degrees and expertise that you don’t have, someone somewhere who actually HAS those degrees (or written those papers) will chime in and correct you.

When that happens, you are stuck; no matter how much time passes, your words are archived and people can and will find them to wave them under your nose, or kick you in the butt with them–to discredit you.

Those who have been around awhile tend to be aware of this, and therefore—don’t generally fib. So if you tell me that you wrote a paper on a movie, then I believe that you wrote that paper. You are bright enough to understand the consequences of lying about something like that, and you are FAR too smart to actually do it.

See, I told you that having a degree doens’t mean a darned thing, and that your debate points stand or fall on their own merits.

Your debate point here is that you apparently have respect for a paper that I wrote and that it reinforces some debate point that I made.

That debate point will stand or fall on its own, regardless of your self-proclaimed expertise.

In this case, the debate point falls. I didn’t write a paper. You have me confused with someone else.

You next point doesn’t hold water. If someone claims to have a degree, how is someone else going to know that the claim is a lie.

If you ask me, those idiot-MBAs don’t show signs of expertise. Look at the mess they made. Someone else looking at what they did could very easily point out their errors and conclude that they don’t have a degree.

Heck, I can point out their errors and claim that it is I who has then MBA not them.

Its seems that you think the degree proves your debate points correct, and that correct debate points proves your claim to have a degree.

Even I know that that logic is flawed.

As I said in an earlier post, having a degree (or “writing a paper”–good grief!) doesn’t necessarily equal expertise. And in Net debate, appeals to degrees to defend a debate point is useless.

You debate points stand or fall on their own merits. You are either right or you’re wrong. Your degree can’t prop up a point that is wrong. If the you’re wrong about something, you’re wrong. Having a degree is irrelevant.

I read 12 Angry Men, and I have seen the movie and the play, and even the Odd Couple episode. My favorite, by far, is the Odd Couple episode.

 

[kalt]

For the record: I believe experience matters. I am the daughter of a man who never graduated from high school, yet, he successfully ran his own business. I would say his experience made him an expert in his field.

I have experience in the media business, but no I would not say that is my expertise. I know people who are light years beyond anything I know. But I would also say my experience is more than a person who goes to a movie once a week for entertainment purposes. My expertise is technology. I am dang good at what I do.

As for writing papers, in school, this is where I do well. Any professor I have had that requires writing tells me I write well. But I am not a writer. Give me those fill in the blank tests and my brain shuts off. In fact, I had this dream once (nightmare) that Salvation was a fill-in-the-blank test. I was sitting in a class room and I just knew I was going to hell because I cannot for the life of me do well on these types of test. Same for homework that is worksheets. TORTURE, is what that is. In my dream, the test was passed out and all the blanks were filled in with the right answer, and the answer was circled as well. Phew! Is all I can say.

Diana gave her experience of suffering. She’s filled in the blanks and feels no need to have that sort of “test”. I understand. Life changes us and who knows, maybe life will change again and she’ll have this desire to watch a film. I don’t believe, in the scheme of things, watching any film really matters. I mean, in terms of Salvation.

Experience matters, it is how our faith grows. It is how we come to know God better and better every day. Our very faith is based on the experiences of those we read of in the Bible, and most all, the experiences of a Person. Jesus Christ. My faith is based on my experiences, my encounters with God. My desire to look Jesus in the face, every day. I think it is a huge mistake to discount experience.

Your experience may help you come up with a debate point that happens to be correct. But the debate point you make stands or falls on its own merits.

Unless you think that an “expert” can’t be wrong.

Some people in Net debates want to take the lazy way out and so they make appeals to their own experience, degrees, papers, etc, rather than defend their debate points with facts.

 

[dianaiad]

See, I told you that having a degree doens’t mean a darned thing, and that your debate points stand or fall on their own merits.

Your debate point here is that you apparently have respect for a paper that I wrote and that it reinforces some debate point that I made.

That debate point will stand or fall on its own, regardless of your self-proclaimed expertise.

In this case, the debate point falls. I didn’t write a paper. You have me confused with someone else.

You next point doesn’t hold water. If someone claims to have a degree, how is someone else going to know that the claim is a lie.

If you ask me, those idiot-MBAs don’t show signs of expertise. Look at the mess they made. Someone else looking at what they did could very easily point out their errors and conclude that they don’t have a degree.

Heck, I can point out their errors and claim that it is I who has then MBA not them.

Its seems that you think the degree proves your debate points correct, and that correct debate points proves your claim to have a degree.

Even I know that that logic is flawed.

As I said in an earlier post, having a degree (or “writing a paper”–good grief!) doesn’t necessarily equal expertise. And in Net debate, appeals to degrees to defend a debate point is useless.

You debate points stand or fall on their own merits. You are either right or you’re wrong. Your degree can’t prop up a point that is wrong. If the you’re wrong about something, you’re wrong. Having a degree is irrelevant.

I read 12 Angry Men, and I have seen the movie and the play, and even the Odd Couple episode. My favorite, by far, is the Odd Couple episode.

You keep harping on the MBA’s

but I don’t have an MBA. My degrees are in English. Your point, then, that there is some correlation between today’s economic woes and my knowledge of English and film history is, then, moot.

 

[dianaiad]

Your experience may help you come up with a debate point that happens to be correct. But the debate point you make stands or falls on its own merits.

Unless you think that an “expert” can’t be wrong.

an expert CAN be wrong. However, you are forgetting something. How do you know when a point is standing on its own merits? After all, I COULD write that, say, Chaucer wrote “the Man of Lawe’s Tale” to be told by himself rather than the tale that most people think he wrote for himself, that is, the tale of Melibee. For some reason, he switched them.

Or, more to the point of this forum, I COULD tell you that Jehovah’s Witnesses are cultists because they believe that you should drink purple kool-aide every Wednesday afternoon promptly at 3:25 PM, Eastern Standard Time.

Now as it happens, the first claim is, according to many experts, probable. The second one, however, is not; it is ludicrous.

But if the ‘point stands on its own,’ how would you know which way to jump? You would have to confirm the facts—and you do that by going to an expert; someone who knows what he or she is talking about. In the second claim, you would go to a Jehovah’s Witness; one of them would be far more able to tell you what their beliefs are than anybody else; they are experts.

As to the first one? Try someone who has a degree in English, and has actually done research on Chaucer.

Someone like, oh…me.

Some people in Net debates want to take the lazy way out and so they make appeals to their own experience, degrees, papers, etc, rather than defend their debate points with facts.

And you would know that the ‘facts’ they are supporting their arguments with are facts because…???

 

[RebeccaJ]

Your experience may help you come up with a debate point that happens to be correct. But the debate point you make stands or falls on its own merits.

Unless you think that an “expert” can’t be wrong.

Some people in Net debates want to take the lazy way out and so they make appeals to their own experience, degrees, papers, etc, rather than defend their debate points with facts.

This is of course your opinion. There are other people who will take nothing on its own merits and call for references at every turn. I say, my name is Rebecca, they would like a reference to prove it please.

You come to know people in internet discussions as well as IRL discussions. I know BS’ers in both. I know people with way too much information in their heads, in both. I don’t really have a formula, this, or that, and whoa stop the conversation because you’ve gone outside of what I expected. I guess you could say I have a more organic approach. “Let’s see what happens.” I never know what I will learn.

 

[kalt]

You keep harping on the MBA’s

but I don’t have an MBA. My degrees are in English. Your point, then, that there is some correlation between today’s economic woes and my knowledge of English and film history is, then, moot.

And I will conclude from this post that you don’t have a degree in English.

Of course I was refering to your claim that your degree confers expertise. I used, in an earlier post to you, the example of idiot-MBAs who make a mess of things.

If their degree isn’t a protection against being wrong in their field of expertise, how is your degree protection against being wrong in your field? How is anyone’s degree a guarantee that they are an expert, or even good at what they do?

Now, did I really have to explain that very clear example to an English major? With an advanced degree?

 

[kalt]

an expert CAN be wrong. However, you are forgetting something. How do you know when a point is standing on its own merits? After all, I COULD write that, say, Chaucer wrote “the Man of Lawe’s Tale” to be told by himself rather than the tale that most people think he wrote for himself, that is, the tale of Melibee. For some reason, he switched them.

Or, more to the point of this forum, I COULD tell you that Jehovah’s Witnesses are cultists because they believe that you should drink purple kool-aide every Wednesday afternoon promptly at 3:25 PM, Eastern Standard Time.

Now as it happens, the first claim is, according to many experts, probable. The second one, however, is not; it is ludicrous.

But if the ‘point stands on its own,’ how would you know which way to jump? You would have to confirm the facts—and you do that by going to an expert; someone who knows what he or she is talking about. In the second claim, you would go to a Jehovah’s Witness; one of them would be far more able to tell you what their beliefs are than anybody else; they are experts.

As to the first one? Try someone who has a degree in English, and has actually done research on Chaucer.

Someone like, oh…me.

And you would know that the ‘facts’ they are supporting their arguments with are facts because…???

Exactly!! We agree. And since you can’t prove your expertise (that you have a degree, even, much less expertise) your appeals to degrees and experience in a Net debate are futile. You will have to make your points and then defend them with facts.

"Or, more to the point of this forum, I COULD tell you that Jehovah’s Witnesses are cultists because they believe that you should drink purple kool-aide every Wednesday afternoon promptly at 3:25 PM, Eastern Standard Time. "

First show the definition of “cult” that you’re working with. Prove that it is an accepted definition.

Prove that JW’s truly do believe that you should drink kool-aide. That it must be purple, and that it must be at that specific time.

Prove that this kool-aide drinking (only if you’ve frist shown that the kool-aide drinking is true) fits the definition of cult-like behavior.

Next prove that this cult-like behavior (if you did, in fact prove that point) is proof that the JW’s are cultists, and that this kool-aide drinking isn’t a behavior that could be interpreted as cult-like only because you haven’t looked at the rest of the faith.

None of those proofs will come from stating that you have a degree. The degree is irrelevant. How you know what you know is irrelevant. You have a degree, and you could wrong. You don’t have a degree, and you could be right. The degree is not proof that your point is correct. The degree is irrelevant, since you can’t point to yourself as an expert in a Net debate.Your credentials are wholly self-proclaimed and so have no provable validity.

If you were a well-know expert…

If you’re really Winston Churchill, I’ll accept your experise in English.

 

[dianaiad]

And I will conclude from this post that you don’t have a degree in English.

Of course I was refering to your claim that your degree confers expertise. I used, in an earlier post to you, the example of idiot-MBAs who make a mess of things.

If their degree isn’t a protection against being wrong in their field of expertise, how is your degree protection against being wrong in your field? How is anyone’s degree a guarantee that they are an expert, or even good at what they do?

You seem to be assuming that a degree guarantees a LACK of expertise in that field, though. You are also basing this upon the assumption that everybody who screwed up the economy had an MBA, and that all MBA’s are thus stupid and have no knowledge of business or the economy.

I would, personally, call that a pretty untenable assumption to make.

Are you going to claim now that someone without a degree knows more about any field than someone who has one?

Now, did I really have to explain that very clear example to an English major? With an advanced degree?

Well, given that you have just committed a fallacy of composition, a 'converse fallacy of accident" (arguing that men with MBA’s have screwed up the economy, thus anyone with an MBA is ignorant of his field; MBA’s are advanced degrees, thus nobody with an advanced degree can be accepted as an expert)

Talk about begging the question!!!

Ah, well…

 

[RebeccaJ]

Having worked in the business world for decades, my view is that it is all an educated guess. MBA’s are trained a certain way, and so they make their educated guesses on how they have been trained. As long has everyone is playing according to the rules, with an underlying ethics, it generally works.

It wasn’t the educated guessing that got us in trouble, it was greed and unethical decision making. Business colleges across the country are shoring up their business ethics focus. Which, is good, I’m sure. It won’t change the fact that many business people view screwing the public as a form of “open market” that should not be regulated.

 

[dianaiad]

Having worked in the business world for decades, my view is that it is all an educated guess. MBA’s are trained a certain way, and so they make their educated guesses on how they have been trained. As long has everyone is playing according to the rules, with an underlying ethics, it generally works.

It wasn’t the educated guessing that got us in trouble, it was greed and unethical decision making. Business colleges across the country are shoring up their business ethics focus. Which, is good, I’m sure. It won’t change the fact that many business people view screwing the public as a form of “open market” that should not be regulated.

Is a problem:

Capitalism only works when there is a deep ethical base to it. You know, the old “in my day a man’s word was his bond” and “a handshake was better than a contract.”

The problem, of course, is that WITHOUT honor and ethics, nothing works–and capitalism turns into something very much else.

Maybe those business schools could start teaching ethics in a coldly practical manner, since ‘morals’ seems to be nonexistent? You know…a restatement of the golden rule: “the best way to keep from getting screwed is not to screw others?”

(sigh)

 

[kalt]

You seem to be assuming that a degree guarantees a LACK of expertise in that field, though.

No. That’s not what I said at all. I said that a degree doesn’t guarantee expertise. That doesn’t mean that it precludes it.

You are also basing this upon the assumption that everybody who screwed up the economy had an MBA, and that all MBA’s are thus stupid and have no knowledge of business or the economy.

Again, you are wrong. I spoke only of the people with MBAs who screwed up. How does that translate to all MBAs or that everyone who screwed up had an MBA? The point made was that having an MBA doesn’t guarantee that the person holding it is always right, an expert, or even good at what he does.

I would, personally, call that a pretty untenable assumption to make.

I didn’t make those assumptions. You did. You can state what you think I think. But you are wrong. That you think that way only proves that you are wrong. You are making invalid logical leaps from what I’ve said. (see above) I have no idea how you made those fantastic leaps.

Are you going to claim now that someone without a degree knows more about any field than someone who has one?

Sometimes that is true. We all know idiots with degrees. We all know extremely knowledgeable people with no degree.

But since I didn’t say that everyone with a degree is an idiot, your counterpoint is invalid.

Well, given that you have just committed a fallacy of composition, a 'converse fallacy of accident" (arguing that men with MBA’s have screwed up the economy, thus anyone with an MBA is ignorant of his field; MBA’s are advanced degrees, thus nobody with an advanced degree can be accepted as an expert)

Actually, that’s a leap that you made. I didn’t say that. You took what I said and made a fantastic, invalid leap of logic. These are leaps that you are making in your own head. I said no such thing.

FWIW, the MBA example came up to show that having a degree is no guarantee that the person is correct. You disagreed with me, so the MBA idiots are an example of how that is actually true. You went from there to assume that that statement meant that all MBAs are idiots–and then you really went wild from there.

Do you really have a degree in English? I actually believed you at first, but with all the trouble you’re having understanding simple statements, I’m really doubting it now.

If you can’t win a point, lie about what the other person said? Bad, bad debater.

Talk about begging the question!!!

Ah, well…

 

[dianaiad]

dianaiad:

Well, given that you have just committed a fallacy of composition, a 'converse fallacy of accident" (arguing that men with MBA’s have screwed up the economy, thus anyone with an MBA is ignorant of his field; MBA’s are advanced degrees, thus nobody with an advanced degree can be accepted as an expert)

Actually, that’s a leap that you made. I didn’t say that. You took what I said and made a fantastic, invalid leap of logic. These are leaps that you are making in your own head. I said no such thing.

Actually, yes, you did; by using that example (and more than once) you were inferring that very chain of logic; people with MBA’s screwed up the economy (and that’s begging a question right there, since you don’t know that only people with MBA’s were responsible for our current economic woes…) therefore MBA degrees are no guarantee of economic expertise.

(as an aside, I would claim that they, conversely, WERE. After all, very few of those MBA’s you are blaming are themselves in financial trouble, are they? They just ruined other people. Their problem wasn’t a lack of economic expertise, but rather a complete lack of ethics)

FWIW, the MBA example came up to show that having a degree is no guarantee that the person is correct. You disagreed with me, so the MBA idiots are an example of how that is actually true.

I didn’t disagree with you that there were people with MBA’s who messed up the economy. I disagreed with your generalization and fallacious argument that because some MBA’s mishandled the economy, that therefore no MBA’s could be trusted to give you expert opinions/knowledge about the economy/business. You then extended that from MBA’s to degrees in every other area, since you used that example to apply to an English degree.

Fallacy of composition, red herring, generalizations and begging the question. Now?

You went from there to assume that that statement meant that all MBAs are idiots–and then you really went wild from there.

Do you really have a degree in English? I actually believed you at first, but with all the trouble you’re having understanding simple statements, I’m really doubting it now.

If you can’t win a point, lie about what the other person said? Bad, bad debater.

Now you go from fallacy to fallacy to ad hominem…calling me a liar; and you are telling me that I am a 'bad debater?"

uh huh.

Well, I can prove my degrees. I can also prove my expertise in this particular forum, since I had to fix your quoting goof so that I could actually answer it.

 

[kalt]

Actually, yes, you did; by using that example (and more than once) you were inferring that very chain of logic; people with MBA’s screwed up the economy (and that’s begging a question right there, since you don’t know that only people with MBA’s were responsible for our current economic woes…) therefore MBA degrees are no guarantee of economic expertise.

(as an aside, I would claim that they, conversely, WERE. After all, very few of those MBA’s you are blaming are themselves in financial trouble, are they? They just ruined other people. Their problem wasn’t a lack of economic expertise, but rather a complete lack of ethics)

I didn’t disagree with you that there were people with MBA’s who messed up the economy. I disagreed with your generalization and fallacious argument that because some MBA’s mishandled the economy, that therefore no MBA’s could be trusted to give you expert opinions/knowledge about the economy/business. You then extended that from MBA’s to degrees in every other area, since you used that example to apply to an English degree.

Fallacy of composition, red herring, generalizations and begging the question. Now?

Now you go from fallacy to fallacy to ad hominem…calling me a liar; and you are telling me that I am a 'bad debater?"

uh huh.

Well, I can prove my degrees. I can also prove my expertise in this particular forum, since I had to fix your quoting goof so that I could actually answer it.

First, I didn’t get through you whole post. It didn’t seem worth my time. I got this far.

“Actually, yes, you did; by using that example (and more than once) you were inferring that very chain of logic; people with MBA’s screwed up the economy (and that’s begging a question right there, since you don’t know that only people with MBA’s were responsible for our current economic woes…) therefore MBA degrees are no guarantee of economic expertise.”

Since you’re still making the same mistake, I’ll point it out just once more. Then we’re done with this.

The chain of logic you are refering to is your own invention. You seem to believe that using the example of MBAs who screw up means that the only people who messed up are MBAs, and more!, that all MBAs are screw ups, even those who work in other fields, apparently. Since you are the only one who thinks this, it’s ridiculous that you’re blaming someone else for saying it.

The last part you got right. "MBA degrees are no guarantee of expertise–or even of competence.

You inferred that fantastic illogical leap. I implied no such thing.