🚀 go-pugleaf

X-Orig-MsgId: <8488r3$h6r$2@news1.bu.edu>

Joel N. Shurkin (joel@nasw.org) wrote:

: I think it is a question of good order and command. An officer who is
: expected to lead his troops into combat must have their complete respect.
: This officer lost any chance of that with his troops. He became an issue. He
: is not supposed to be an issue. Any army would have disciplined him ,
: including the US.

let's go back to this officer's dilemma. AFAIK (I may be wrong), that 
was specifically a lecture and whether he came to the topi, or he
was asked a question, he ended up confronting the issue. Now, he happens
to hold an opinion that is quite common among people, including many
learned and esteemed, that activities of non-O Judaisms led to 
disasters for the Jewish nation as a whole. Now, you may disagree
with it, but IMVHO, it is no less valid than, say, an opinion of
a modern researcher about who and when edited the Humash. It is
a serious and informed opinion and you can write academic articles
pro- and contra- on the topic, I am sure.

Now, what should he have done - should he have lied and say something
non-offensive? should he have refused to answer the question?
should he have refused to teach lectures in general in order
to avoid these situations?
should he have been more polite?
 
any ideas?


--
Simcha Streltsov		disclaimer, as requested by Mo-he S-rr
simchastr@juno.com		all punctuation marks in this article
http://cad.bu.edu/go/simon	are equivalent to (-: