I like Dalrymple’s writing, but this piece makes it clear that he’s no philosopher. His attempted rebuttal to the “philosophic argument” is sloppy and weak, full of equivocations, failures to pursue lines of reasoning to their logical endpoints or to see obvious implications, etc. I expected more, and was disappointed.
I like Dalrymple’s writing, but this piece makes it clear that he’s no philosopher. His attempted rebuttal to the “philosophic argument” is sloppy and weak, full of equivocations, failures to pursue lines of reasoning to their logical endpoints or to see obvious implications, etc. I expected more, and was disappointed.
I did not replicate his argument in full. I merely selected interesting excerpts to comment upon.
The full essay can be read online here.
My comment was based on the essay, not on your summary (which I also read, of course). (You did link the essay in your post…)