What is your opinion of author Robert Spencer's books?

[josie_L]

My response will be somewhat simplistic.

Point 1 Very few of the media “experts” and TV pundits who inform or misinform us about Islam, Christianity or any political topic you would care to mention have any credentials whatsoever.

Point 2 - if we relied only the academically sanctioned and approved “experts” to comment on religion and current affairs, we would most likely hear a chorus of left-wing, atheist opinions. I know that are one or two exceptions to this, but they just prove the norm.

Point 3 - having spent a good portion of my life in the university setting, I am capable of forming an opinion on this, that or the other. I know very many professors in political science who have a very definite agenda. Their inflexibility does reflect honest inquiry.

Point 4 - calling someone an “expert” done not make him so.

Point 5 - if only the PhD’s were allowed to opine on matters of religion, or anything else for that matter, the world would be subject to the officially sanctioned tyranny, something we already see in the academe.

Finally - religious studies, politics, etc. are not “hard sciences”. They do demand academic discipline, but are highly theoretical. And there is lots of room for divergent opinions.

Actually there is a word for this: “Technocracy” - “the idea that scientists and intellectuals ought to lead society within areas of their expertise.”

And having spent 8 years in university I know full well how left-leaning academic institutions can be, in all honesty, my education started once I left school or rather when I took an interest in reading up on issues that were not simply a regurgitation of a professor’s POV.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

Actually there is a word for this: “Technocracy” - “the idea that scientists and intellectuals ought to lead society within areas of their expertise.”

And having spent a 8 years in university I know full well how left-leaning academic institutions can be, in all honesty, my education started once I left school or rather when I took an interest in reading up on issues that were not simply a regurgitation of a professor’s POV.

Amen to that…

Expertise is nothing without credibility.

 

[josie_L]

Paragraph one and two apparently aren’t addressed in this thread since not only did I introduce as a direct response to your own indirect answer to my question concerning Mr. Spencer looking to be more qualified as an expert on secular politics and punditry than religion. Should I take it then that your just leading this conversation in circles since you are unable to directly answer my question?

There are other people you can read, but I don’t see why you shouldn’t at least attempt to read Mr. Spencer, i.e., he’s gone to great lengths to write what he does, i.e,. he needs 24 hour protection because of all the threats he’s received.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

There are other people you can read, but I don’t see why you shouldn’t at least attempt to read Mr. Spencer, i.e., he’s gone to great lengths to write what he does, i.e,. he needs 24 hour protection because of all the threats he’s received.

-I don’t read Mr. Spencer because he isn’t an expert and therefore you either a) have to reference an actual expert to separate the wheat from the chaff; so why not just read the actual expert or b) accept or dismiss both the wheat and the chaff by not referencing an actual expert.
-Citing that he needs protection is an appeal to emotion, and really has nothing to do with him being an expert or the validity of his work.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

Yes, but he has an M. A. in Religious Studies, which I would assume does include Islam, even if his thesis was on Catholicism, and therefore, my reason for stating that you comparing Spencer to Dawkins was unfair. It’s not like Spencer was coming out of left field by writing books about Islam, whereas someone like Dawkins has no theological background whatsoever, and as such is completely unfit to talk of religious matters.
Thank for the further clarification. Yes, you do have a valid point in this regard and I’ll need to revise who I use to compare Mr. Spencer with in the future.
Moreover, Spencer is not the only person I read with respect to Islam, however, maybe you’d be interested in reading Hillaire Belloc (I’ve also read Oriana Fallaci’s “The Rage and The Pride” and Robert Riley’s "The Closing Of The Muslim Mind’, and Emeritus Pope Benedict’s XVI Regensburg address . . . etc.).
I didn’t mean to imply that you specifically only read Mr. Spencer. If that is how my post came off I think I need to step back from the thread for a day. I’ve learned the hard way (as in devolving to uncharitable comments and being rightly cited for them) that if I start coming off as specifically talking about another poster in this manner I need to step back from the thread. I’ll use that time to review the works you listed.

 

[robwar]

“Oh noes, Spencer doesn’t have the right degrees!! (Except the masters in religious studies, but ignore that)”

Stop listening to what other people say about him who are not disinterested observers (this leaves out hacks and jihadist apologists like Karen Armstrong), and just read his books. They are dispassionate, scholarly, and filled with references, especially from the best traditional tafsir. They are great sources to learn about Islam.

Anybody who’s got some common sense will know that this “doesn’t have the proper degrees” card is just grasping at straws and pure ad hominem from people who can’t face the facts and don’t like what he’s saying. What’s next, you can’t read Thucydides and Josephus because they didn’t get the right degrees?

Yes! that is it. those who are critical of him either haven’t bothered to read his books and take it a step further and read his references. Nor are they fluent in Arabic. Robert shared in one of his books how he was practicing his Arabic with an Islamic friend and said the Shahala. His friend then told Robert that he was now a Muslem because he said the Shahala and his friend is a Muslem witness to it. His grandparents were Greek Christians that escaped Islam and their stories are what fueled his interest and study.

 

[josie_L]

-I don’t read Mr. Spencer because he isn’t an expert and therefore you either a) have to reference an actual expert to separate the wheat from the chaff; so why not just read the actual expert or b) accept or dismiss both the wheat and the chaff by not referencing an actual expert.
-Citing that he needs protection is an appeal to emotion, and really has nothing to do with him being an expert or the validity of his work.

I mentioned that only because his motive can’t be money, i.e., he has family you see, writing the things he does will put them in danger.

God bless.

 

[josie_L]

I didn’t mean to imply that you specifically only read Mr. Spencer. If that is how my post came off I think I need to step back from the thread for a day. I’ve learned the hard way (as in devolving to uncharitable comments and being rightly cited for them) that if I start coming off as specifically talking about another poster in this manner I need to step back from the thread. I’ll use that time to review the works you listed.

No, problem, although I’m not so sure Oriana Fallaci will be to your liking (she’s rather blunt).

P.S. Read Hillaire Belloc and Robert Riley’s books these will be more to your liking.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

I mentioned that only because his motive can’t be money, i.e., he has family you see, writing the things he does will put them in danger.

God bless.

I don’t think his main motive in writing what he writes is money. I’m sure the money he gets from it is nice, but I wouldn’t take any argument he does it for the money seriously. Besides the danger to himself and his family, he’s not a stupid man. He could easily make more money doing something else that is a lot safer.

Ok, now I’m really going to pop smoke for a day.

 

[josie_L]

I don’t think his main motive in writing what he writes is money. I’m sure the money he gets from it is nice, but I wouldn’t take any argument he does it for the money seriously. Besides the danger to himself and his family, he’s not a stupid man. He could easily make more money doing something else that is a lot safer.

Ok, now I’m really going to pop smoke for a day.

Do you mean disappear, I’m not sure what you mean?

 

[Dialogues]

… His grandparents were Greek Christians that escaped Islam and their stories are what fueled his interest and study.

That may explain his hostility towards Islam, i.e. the unIslamic actions of some so-called ‘Muslims’ who don’t act upon the teachings of Islam, as experienced by his grand-parents, such as these verses:

*"And if your Lord had enforced His will, surely, all who are in the earth would have believed together. Will you then force people to become believers? [10:99]

“It is the truth from your Lord, wherefore let him who will believe, and let him who will, disbelieve.” (18:29)*

Peace.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Should I take it then that your just leading this conversation in circles since you are unable to directly answer my question?

No you should have taken it to mean exactly what I stated. I responded to your circular argument on page one. And I have no desire to argue with you. Do you not understand this clearly by the posts on this thread?

“The problem there is that most are usually not qualified to speak on behalf of anyone but themselves. What qualification does one need to decide Robert Spencer in not qualified?”

By your own admission your not qualified, you have an opinion. So lets look at it.

“perhaps the foremost Catholic expert on Islam in our country”

Expert being self proclaimed is rather irrelevant as I suggest.

And the Church. You know, the institution that pretty much laid the foundation for the Western idea that experts need to be qualified;

That’s the one I’m in agreement with, the Church.

Then you proceeded to prove my point by raising your opinion over CAF along with a host of other provided samples many who disagree with you. From there I showed why Spencer as a Catholic and American not only has the right but the responsibility to speak up and write, and he is informed to do so. Again you placed you “opinion” above that to which you mentioned

Who cares?)

I do and so do many others, and about the Constitution, to which you digress to the “government” Your point, everyone has a constitution including Russia is one of relevance.

Again page one…

“The problem there is that most are usually not qualified to speak on behalf of anyone but themselves. What qualification does one need to decide Robert Spencer in not qualified?”

You…

I’ve really only read the intro to one of his books

and

I don’t read his works because I don’t want to bias myself against what he gets right. I’m quite sure that after studying Islam for 30+ years he correctly identifies aspects of Islam.

and

If the money trail bothers you

,
You “alone” bought this up in conspiracy theory. Also here…

You don’t like Saudi funded experts?

conspiracy theory to which you said yourself…

I don’t think his main motive in writing what he writes is money

and

I wouldn’t take any argument he does it for the money seriously.

But yet you bought it up to suggest we should pay no attention to it.

If only the Church had actual experts on Islam. Oh wait, they do.?

I notice this is a regular response by you.

If there is something in particular you would like to us to read regarding the Church, why not show us, instead of suggesting …

There is putting your faith in front of your politics (CAF, it’s not too hard to guess the politics of the various authors on the site, but their politics have, in my experience, always taken a second seat to the faith) and there is putting your politics in front of your faith (which is what I see in a lot of those sites I listed before)

You’ll have to clearly elaborate for us to dialogue. What about CAF? They are diametrically opposed to your “opinion” and the Church. Are you saying here CAF put politics before Faith? “politics of the various authors on the site” ?

Who cares?)

I do. And what do you want me or us to read by the Church? You insist on having this expert conversation. I just “wanted” to have a honest open dialogue about a topic many consider important. But if I have to entertain your “expert logic” failing of an argument than I wish you a good day and God Bless you.

Peace

 

[GaryTaylor]

That may explain his hostility towards Islam,.

I think also the debates are a terrible way to proceed. Giving a speech, writing a book is one thing, but the debates are over the top. imho.

 

[qui_est_ce]

No, problem, although I’m not so sure Oriana Fallaci will be to your liking (she’s rather blunt).

P.S. Read Hillaire Belloc and Robert Riley’s books these will be more to your liking.

For some of us, the experts’ writings are above our mental capacity, therefore it is nice to have someone like Robert Spencer write in a more comprehensible manner. He has done his research and references his sources. Patrick Coffin has had him on his show numerous times.

 

[josie_L]

For some of us, the experts’ writings are above our mental capacity, therefore it is nice to have someone like Robert Spencer write in a more comprehensible manner. He has done his research and references his sources. Patrick Coffin has had him on his show numerous times.

You should read Robert Riley’s book “The Closing Of The Muslim Mind: How Intellectual Suicide Created The Modern Islamist Crisis”, it’s not hard to read and actually gets to the root of Islamism.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

No you should have taken it to mean exactly what I stated. I responded to your circular argument on page one. And I have no desire to argue with you. Do you not understand this clearly by the posts on this thread?

“The problem there is that most are usually not qualified to speak on behalf of anyone but themselves. What qualification does one need to decide Robert Spencer in not qualified?”

By your own admission your not qualified, you have an opinion. So lets look at it.

“perhaps the foremost Catholic expert on Islam in our country”

Expert being self proclaimed is rather irrelevant as I suggest.

That’s the one I’m in agreement with, the Church.

Then you proceeded to prove my point by raising your opinion over CAF along with a host of other provided samples many who disagree with you. From there I showed why Spencer as a Catholic and American not only has the right but the responsibility to speak up and write, and he is informed to do so. Again you placed you “opinion” above that to which you mentioned

I do and so do many others, and about the Constitution, to which you digress to the “government” Your point, everyone has a constitution including Russia is one of relevance.

Again page one…

“The problem there is that most are usually not qualified to speak on behalf of anyone but themselves. What qualification does one need to decide Robert Spencer in not qualified?”

You…

and

and

,
You “alone” bought this up in conspiracy theory. Also here…

conspiracy theory to which you said yourself…

and

But yet you bought it up to suggest we should pay no attention to it.

I notice this is a regular response by you.

If there is something in particular you would like to us to read regarding the Church, why not show us, instead of suggesting …

You’ll have to clearly elaborate for us to dialogue. What about CAF? They are diametrically opposed to your “opinion” and the Church. Are you saying here CAF put politics before Faith? “politics of the various authors on the site” ?

I do. And what do you want me or us to read by the Church? You insist on having this expert conversation. I just “wanted” to have a honest open dialogue about a topic many consider important. But if I have to entertain your “expert logic” failing of an argument than I wish you a good day and God Bless you.

Peace

-I started talking about conspiracies and money? Last I checked my user name wasn’t Josie L and I didn’t write- “There is much out there that is supposedly scholarly but is funded by Saudi money, in fact, even many university departments on Islamic studies is funded by the Saudis.”

-Apparently my, as you write it, “expert logic” fails you because you think the topic of this thread you want “to have a honest open dialogue” on is about free speech. Hence your first post being all about free speech and hate speech.

-Your “who are we to determine who is an expert or not” argument- Hey, it’s a great line when you can’t actually defend Spencer’s lack of actual credentials, but since this isn’t the first thread you’ve tried to use it on I’m getting tired of it. It’s a cop-out no different than the false usage of “we aren’t supposed to judge people.” The Church, human society as a whole, and Western society specifically all have a long history of figuring out how to determine who is or is not an expert and what these individuals must do in order to be considered one.

Want to be considered an expert a scholarly subject- get proper level of training (i.e. the degrees), use the proper methodology, have your work recognized by your peers in the field of study, actually work in your field (i.e. don’t work for 20 years in think tanks focused on politics), don’t have your main source of support and income be from an organization that specializes on something completely different (i.e. don’t have the vast majority of your works published by companies focused on secular politics, don’t have the majority of your lectures, articles, columns be with organizations focused on secular politics, don’t co-found an organization focused on a specific item of secular politics with a activist who focuses on secular politics, and don’t have your main outlet [Jihad Watch] founded by and still closely linked with an organization focused on secular politics). Figuring out who should be considered an expert and who shouldn’t be isn’t that hard if you actually want to. The only people who seem to have problems doing this are those who want their particular “expert” to be an expert because they agree with what he is saying.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Background information about author’s lives help you identify the forces that may have shaped their perspectives and influenced their writing. There are many points made to consider, as its also important as to what theme we are focusing on. Its also important Spencers book has in many ways been reviewed, as by CAF and many others mentioned.

Thoughts?

 

[GaryTaylor]

Apparently my, as you write it, “expert logic” fails you because you think the topic of this thread you want “to have a honest open dialogue” on is about free speech. Hence your first post being all about free speech and hate speech. .

No its a theme “in” his writing which I agree with him on.

-Your “who are we to determine who is an expert or not” argument- Hey, it’s a great line when you can’t actually defend Spencer’s lack of actual credentials, but since this isn’t the first thread you’ve tried to use it on I’m getting tired of it…

His defense is in those who have reviewed his books to which you have no response and gloss over as if not mentioned. The expert opinion in your defense is, I think you?

It’s a cop-out no different than the false usage of “we aren’t supposed to judge people.” The Church, human society as a whole, and Western society specifically all have a long history of figuring out how to determine who is or is not an expert and what these individuals must do in order to be considered one…

I’m sorry I think you are underestimating others ability in reviewing a book and realizing its validity.

have your work recognized by your peers .

Like CAF and all others mentioned? I’m really confused by your conversation.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

No its a theme “in” his writing which I agree with him on.

His defense is in those who have reviewed his books to which you have no response and gloss over as if not mentioned. The expert opinion in your defense is, I think you?

I’m sorry I think you are underestimating others ability in reviewing a book and realizing its validity.

Like CAF and all others mentioned? I’m really confused by your conversation.

-I have found three types of reviews of his work.
Type A- It’s great- reviewer just happens to work for or receives work from another David Horowitz organization and/or just happens to only get glowing reviews of their work from Mr. Spencer and/or just happens to work for the company trying to sell his books.
Type B-He’s a bigot- reviewer has a vested interest to find the work bad
Type C- They’re poorly researched and written- reviewer actually has a degree on Islam and actually works in the field of Islam, or reviewer has a degree in a similar field (philosophy, sociology, etc) and actually works in those fields.

I’d be more than happy to read any reviews of his works that don’t fall into one of the above three categories.

CAF- Mind showing me where in the CAF mission statement they make a claim about being experts on Islam? I looked, but I can’t find it. I’m confused as to why you are assuming CAF has the ability to declare someone an expert or not.

 

[josie_L]

-I started talking about conspiracies and money? Last I checked my user name wasn’t Josie L and I didn’t write- “There is much out there that is supposedly scholarly but is funded by Saudi money, in fact, even many university departments on Islamic studies is funded by the Saudis.”

If I can be of any help I think he is referring to post #23, wherein you wrote:

“-If the money trail bothers you, review Mr. Spencer’s. You’ll find it leads to a politically motivated, secularly focused organization.”

I don’t deny that I was the one who brought up the subject but only because many supposed scholars/experts who are accepted by the mainstream are bankrolled by Saudi money, moreover, it is not conspiracies of which I speak, here’s an article by Fox News but reprinted by “The Muslim Times”:

The UN agency that promotes education wants a say in how future textbooks are written, and Saudi Arabia — a nation whose own school books have been criticized for promoting hatred of Christians and Jews — is helping to bankroll the effort.

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) is currently working with member states to revise its strategy for the publication of textbooks and learning materials. According to UNESCO’s website, experts from 21 countries met in Paris last month at a meeting financed by a $29,000 Saudi donation and focused in part on “ways to ensure that content aimed at students systematically reflects cultural and religious diversity, and avoids gender stereotypes.”

Then, last week, Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah cut a $20 million check to UNESCO’s emergency fund.

Critics warn that the funding will come at a price, and predict the Saudis will want (name removed by moderator)ut into what goes into rewritten textbooks.

“Saudi textbooks are extremely hateful and full of xenophobic texts,” said Ali AlAhmed, author of the upcoming book “Saudi School Books: Objective Education or Extremist Indoctrination?” and director of the Gulf Institute in Washington, D.C.

According to AlAhmed, the Saudi funding “shows how xenophobic governments like [that of] the Saudis are able to buy influence.” He said UNESCO was betraying its mandate to uphold “value and standards of education and tolerance” as he warned UNESCO and the UN system as a whole were “susceptible to financial buyouts from countries like Saudi Arabia.”

Read more: themuslimtimes.org/2012/10/countries/saudi-arabia/un-agency-funded-with-saudi-money-wants-to-edit-worldwide-textbooks#ixzz2vzsFOk1Q

Here’s something else I think you’d be interested in reading, unfortunately I can’t copy and paste because it’s a google book, but it pertains to Saudi money affecting U.S. curriculum on Islamic studies:

books.google.ca/books?id=NXLHAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA66&lpg=PA66&dq=Is+karen+armstrong+funded+by+saudi+money&source=bl&ots=_DkoRhBry5&sig=Kyxg3zLjyVxA0T1JnHvpk4sqsJ8&hl=en&sa=X&ei=68MjU5HfIseBqwHs1YHwDg&ved=0CCwQ6AEwATgK#v=onepage&q=Is%20karen%20armstrong%20funded%20by%20saudi%20money&f=false

Please start reading from pg 65, “The Stealth Curriculum”.

P.S. Robert Spencer may not be accepted by the mainstream media or academia, but his credentials are far greater than others they have deemed experts in the field of religious studies, for example, Karen Armstrong (an ex-Catholic nun) who has a degree in Literature is lauded by the mainstream media and academia has an expert on comparative religious studies (she wrote a book on Islam that was so popular that the Saudi government sent copies of it after 911). She has been awarded honorary degrees, worked with the U.N., and received prizes for her works, all because she tows the line, i.e., she has liberal views and is politically correct, yet she has no credentials in the field whatsoever.