The Case For Israel

Propose a formal or informal debate or discussion in this forum. Declare a challenge/invitation or respond to one.
User avatar
columbus
Posts: 2709
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 11:47 pm

The Case For Israel

Post by columbus » Tue Aug 09, 2011 4:13 pm

A few weeks ago, Charles (cnorman18) suggested a book to read concerning the situation in Palestine/Israel. I was quite impressed with it. He and I are proposing an informal discussion about the book and the issues raised. The book is "The Case For Israel", by Alan Dershowitz. There will also be a peanut gallery anyone is free to post in.

I've never done this sort of discussion, but I think I've covered what needs be here in the proposal.

Tom
I am remarkably conservative and judgemental for a queer atheist.

Full Tilt Boogie
Posts: 3855
Joined: Sun May 22, 2011 12:12 am
Location: UK
Contact:

Post by Full Tilt Boogie » Tue Aug 09, 2011 4:20 pm

You might want to toss up a link to where others can view this in the 'peanut gallery'.
"Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people." -- Eleanor Roosevelt

My Blog: Cosmic Navel Lint

User avatar
Barefoot Bree
Posts: 9312
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 3:11 pm
Location: On the highway - could be anywhere!

Post by Barefoot Bree » Tue Aug 09, 2011 4:22 pm

Does the book exist online anywhere, for those of us too broke to buy it?
There's no such thing as "political correctness". The phrase you're looking for is "Common Decency".
"Said" it? Sink me! She almost SANG it!

User avatar
cnorman18
Posts: 2123
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 4:34 pm
Location: Fort Worth, Texas

Post by cnorman18 » Tue Aug 09, 2011 4:37 pm

[quote=""Barefoot Bree""]Does the book exist online anywhere, for those of us too broke to buy it?[/quote]

Unfortunately, no. It is available as an ebook from several services. It should also be widely available in libraries and used-book shops; it's been around for a while.

The object of this discussion is to talk about the past, present and future of this conflict without, it is to be hoped, the usual partisan namecalling and rancor. Columbus and I will be posting moderated remarks, and I think that he'd agree that neither of us will be responsible for, nor obligated to either respond to nor defend, any remarks from others in the PG. For myself, I regard participation in that PG thread -- presumably this one -- as entirely optional and irrelevant to the main conversation.

Looking forward to the discussion.
"The Torah is true, and some of it may even have happened."
-- Rabbi William Gershon
"Faith is hope, not fact."
-- Herman Wouk

User avatar
columbus
Posts: 2709
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 11:47 pm

Post by columbus » Tue Aug 09, 2011 4:40 pm

[quote=""Barefoot Bree""]Does the book exist online anywhere, for those of us too broke to buy it?[/quote]
Cheapskate that I am, I rarely buy books. I had no trouble getting it from my local library.

Tom
I am remarkably conservative and judgemental for a queer atheist.

User avatar
Redshirt
Posts: 1663
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:20 pm
Location: Canada

Post by Redshirt » Tue Aug 09, 2011 4:43 pm

[quote=""Full Tilt Boogie""]You might want to toss up a link to where others can view this in the 'peanut gallery'.[/quote]

We first need to set up the parameters of this debate. This forum is intended for that purpose. See the Procedures and FAQ. When the parameters are agreed to, a debate thread gets set up in this forum.

cnorman18 and Columbus, would you prefer a more structured debate or something more informal?

User avatar
Barefoot Bree
Posts: 9312
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 3:11 pm
Location: On the highway - could be anywhere!

Post by Barefoot Bree » Tue Aug 09, 2011 4:44 pm

Well, hopefully my pitiful small-town excuse for a library system will have it somewhere within its network. Rather doubtful. But I'll try.
There's no such thing as "political correctness". The phrase you're looking for is "Common Decency".
"Said" it? Sink me! She almost SANG it!

User avatar
columbus
Posts: 2709
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 11:47 pm

Post by columbus » Tue Aug 09, 2011 4:50 pm

[quote=""Redshirt""]
Full Tilt Boogie;246748 wrote:You might want to toss up a link to where others can view this in the 'peanut gallery'.
We first need to set up the parameters of this debate. This forum is intended for that purpose. See the Procedures and FAQ. When the parameters are agreed to, a debate thread gets set up in this forum.

cnorman18 and Columbus, would you prefer a more structured debate or something more informal?[/QUOTE]

I believe we're agreed on the most informal possible discussion here in the exclusive section. I could start the peanut gallery, although I'm not sure how to do links. I'm pretty net stupid :o

Tom
I am remarkably conservative and judgemental for a queer atheist.

Full Tilt Boogie
Posts: 3855
Joined: Sun May 22, 2011 12:12 am
Location: UK
Contact:

Post by Full Tilt Boogie » Tue Aug 09, 2011 4:52 pm

As an aside, there is one nagging, legitimate concern I have about Dershowitz writing on The Case for Israel - that of impartiality - he being an American vocally pro-Israel Jew - kinda like expecting a Pol Pot-penned case for 'Year Zero' to be impartial. If you've already read any of Dershowitz's other works, e.g. Why Terrorism Works, you'll know what I mean.

Just saying...
"Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people." -- Eleanor Roosevelt

My Blog: Cosmic Navel Lint

User avatar
columbus
Posts: 2709
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 11:47 pm

Post by columbus » Tue Aug 09, 2011 4:52 pm

And I really must leave for work now, I'm already pretty late. Look forward to this evening!

Tom
I am remarkably conservative and judgemental for a queer atheist.

User avatar
Redshirt
Posts: 1663
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:20 pm
Location: Canada

Post by Redshirt » Tue Aug 09, 2011 5:29 pm

[quote=""columbus""]
I believe we're agreed on the most informal possible discussion here in the exclusive section. I could start the peanut gallery, although I'm not sure how to do links. I'm pretty net stupid :o

Tom[/quote]

Don't worry, I'll set up the gallery.

Here are some proposed guidelines for a more flexible informal discussion format:

(1) Topic: "The case for Israel"
(2) Participants: Columbus and cnorman18
(3) Criteria: The discussion will revolve around an assessment of the arguments presented in the book "The Case For Israel", by Alan Dershowitz.

Do you both agree to these parameters? Please confirm and I'll be happy to set up the discussion thread and peanut gallery.
Last edited by Redshirt on Tue Aug 09, 2011 10:17 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Reason: Changed "debate" to "discussion" and rephrased (2)

David B
Posts: 12878
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:47 pm

Post by David B » Tue Aug 09, 2011 5:50 pm

IIRC it is normal in formal debates for participants to not participate in the peanut gallery at all until the debate is over.

This is slightly different, though I would still prefer the discussion to be for the participants and the peanut gallery to be for non participants, I think Redshirt's views on this should be adopted, whatever they may be.

David

User avatar
cnorman18
Posts: 2123
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 4:34 pm
Location: Fort Worth, Texas

Post by cnorman18 » Tue Aug 09, 2011 6:20 pm

[quote=""Full Tilt Boogie""]As an aside, there is one nagging, legitimate concern I have about Dershowitz writing on The Case for Israel - that of impartiality - he being an American vocally pro-Israel Jew - kinda like expecting a Pol Pot-penned case for 'Year Zero' to be impartial. If you've already read any of Dershowitz's other works, e.g. Why Terrorism Works, you'll know what I mean.

Just saying...[/quote]

Of course he's biased; he doesn't pretend otherwise, and neither do I. But:

(1) Bias does not automatically indicate either dishonesty or poor logic; one may be biased and still be truthful and correct.

Therefore, (2) Discounting an argument on the basis of bias alone is not logical. Let's look at his arguments and see if they hold water, regardless of any perceived bias.

(3) By that standard, the opinions of interested parties may not be considered. If we are only to consider arguments from the "impartial," then neither Jews nor Palestinians may participate in the discussion.

(4) Being Jewish does not automatically entail a pro-Israel bias, anyway. Noam Chomsky is Jewish, and he's as anti-Israel as it gets.

I know this isn't your belief, and that an awareness of where everyone is coming from is necessary in any debate or discussion; but for Jews who are sensitive about the issue, it's easy to infer the all-too-common subtext of "Jews lie" when that objection is raised. Let's be aware of that possible bias on the part of some as we enter this discussion, too.

I'd like to stress that this discussion -- not debate -- ought not affect the positive and, let us hope, fruitful discussion that the "borders" thread has become.
"The Torah is true, and some of it may even have happened."
-- Rabbi William Gershon
"Faith is hope, not fact."
-- Herman Wouk

User avatar
Redshirt
Posts: 1663
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:20 pm
Location: Canada

Post by Redshirt » Tue Aug 09, 2011 8:53 pm

cnorman & Columbus,

Do you agree with the parameters I outlined above? (except replace "debate" with the word "discussion")

Full Tilt Boogie
Posts: 3855
Joined: Sun May 22, 2011 12:12 am
Location: UK
Contact:

Post by Full Tilt Boogie » Tue Aug 09, 2011 9:26 pm

[quote=""cnorman18""]
Full Tilt Boogie;246771 wrote:As an aside, there is one nagging, legitimate concern I have about Dershowitz writing on The Case for Israel - that of impartiality - he being an American vocally pro-Israel Jew - kinda like expecting a Pol Pot-penned case for 'Year Zero' to be impartial. If you've already read any of Dershowitz's other works, e.g. Why Terrorism Works, you'll know what I mean.

Just saying...
Of course he's biased; he doesn't pretend otherwise, and neither do I... [/quote]

As long as that's clear and understood from the outset.
"Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people." -- Eleanor Roosevelt

My Blog: Cosmic Navel Lint

User avatar
cnorman18
Posts: 2123
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 4:34 pm
Location: Fort Worth, Texas

Post by cnorman18 » Tue Aug 09, 2011 9:31 pm

Well, yes; except I won't be opposing...

From my previous correspondence with Columbus, I think we'll be agreeing on some things and not on others, all related to Dershowitz's book. What those specific aspects are, I don't think we know; that's rather the object of the discussion.

Otherwise -- onward!
"The Torah is true, and some of it may even have happened."
-- Rabbi William Gershon
"Faith is hope, not fact."
-- Herman Wouk

User avatar
cnorman18
Posts: 2123
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 4:34 pm
Location: Fort Worth, Texas

Post by cnorman18 » Tue Aug 09, 2011 9:37 pm

[quote=""Full Tilt Boogie""]
cnorman18;246794 wrote:
Full Tilt Boogie;246771 wrote:As an aside, there is one nagging, legitimate concern I have about Dershowitz writing on The Case for Israel - that of impartiality - he being an American vocally pro-Israel Jew - kinda like expecting a Pol Pot-penned case for 'Year Zero' to be impartial. If you've already read any of Dershowitz's other works, e.g. Why Terrorism Works, you'll know what I mean.

Just saying...
Of course he's biased; he doesn't pretend otherwise, and neither do I...
As long as that's clear and understood from the outset.[/QUOTE]

Of course; but as I said, bias alone is irrelevant. Anyone who has an opinion on this subject could be said to be "biased," and that could be said about any subject at all. Atheists are biased against creationism; that doesn't make them wrong.
"The Torah is true, and some of it may even have happened."
-- Rabbi William Gershon
"Faith is hope, not fact."
-- Herman Wouk

User avatar
Jobar
Posts: 26251
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:42 pm
Location: Georgia

Post by Jobar » Tue Aug 09, 2011 10:04 pm

From my understanding, this isn't to be an argument with opposing positions, but a more structured and exclusive discussion between columbus and cnorman18.

The possibility of more participants than just those two has been raised, but AFAIC that's entirely up to them.

User avatar
Redshirt
Posts: 1663
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:20 pm
Location: Canada

Post by Redshirt » Tue Aug 09, 2011 10:14 pm

[quote=""cnorman18""]Well, yes; except I won't be opposing...

From my previous correspondence with Columbus, I think we'll be agreeing on some things and not on others, all related to Dershowitz's book. What those specific aspects are, I don't think we know; that's rather the object of the discussion.

Otherwise -- onward![/quote]

Thanks, I'll re-word that then. We just need Columbus to affirm the parameters above and then we'll be ready to start.

Full Tilt Boogie
Posts: 3855
Joined: Sun May 22, 2011 12:12 am
Location: UK
Contact:

Post by Full Tilt Boogie » Tue Aug 09, 2011 10:18 pm

[quote=""cnorman18""]
Full Tilt Boogie;246863 wrote:
cnorman18;246794 wrote:
Full Tilt Boogie;246771 wrote:As an aside, there is one nagging, legitimate concern I have about Dershowitz writing on The Case for Israel - that of impartiality - he being an American vocally pro-Israel Jew - kinda like expecting a Pol Pot-penned case for 'Year Zero' to be impartial. If you've already read any of Dershowitz's other works, e.g. Why Terrorism Works, you'll know what I mean.

Just saying...
Of course he's biased; he doesn't pretend otherwise, and neither do I...
As long as that's clear and understood from the outset.
Of course; but as I said, bias alone is irrelevant. Anyone who has an opinion on this subject could be said to be "biased," and that could be said about any subject at all. Atheists are biased against creationism; that doesn't make them wrong.[/QUOTE]

I'm happy to see how your wee tête-à-tête rolls out mate, is just that if you're entering a discussion in the knowledge that the subject matter is partial and biased towards, "The Case for Israel", then it rather risks being like reading a treatise written by a turkey on why Christmas and Thanksgiving should be abolished - unless you're prepared, during the course of the exchange, to acknowledge that bias.

Have at it. :)
"Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people." -- Eleanor Roosevelt

My Blog: Cosmic Navel Lint

User avatar
cnorman18
Posts: 2123
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 4:34 pm
Location: Fort Worth, Texas

Post by cnorman18 » Tue Aug 09, 2011 10:30 pm

[quote=""Full Tilt Boogie""]
cnorman18;246867 wrote:
Full Tilt Boogie;246863 wrote:
cnorman18;246794 wrote: Of course he's biased; he doesn't pretend otherwise, and neither do I...
As long as that's clear and understood from the outset.
Of course; but as I said, bias alone is irrelevant. Anyone who has an opinion on this subject could be said to be "biased," and that could be said about any subject at all. Atheists are biased against creationism; that doesn't make them wrong.
I'm happy to see how your wee tête-à-tête rolls out mate, is just that if you're entering a discussion in the knowledge that the subject matter is partial and biased towards, "The Case for Israel", then it rather risks being like reading a treatise written by a turkey on why Christmas and Thanksgiving should be abolished - unless you're prepared, during the course of the exchange, to acknowledge that bias.

Have at it. :) [/QUOTE]

You seem to keep implying that there's something inherently suspect about having an opinion about Israel -- or, more properly, a positive one. Tell me honestly -- would you be this concerned if the title of the book were "The Case Against Israel"?
"The Torah is true, and some of it may even have happened."
-- Rabbi William Gershon
"Faith is hope, not fact."
-- Herman Wouk

User avatar
rog
Posts: 12712
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2010 2:21 pm
Location: UK

Post by rog » Tue Aug 09, 2011 10:33 pm

I'm not a mod in this area but I can guess what they would say: This subforum is exclusively for arranging formal debates & exclusive engagements, any discussion of the actual issues should take place in an appropriate forum elsewhere on the board.

Full Tilt Boogie
Posts: 3855
Joined: Sun May 22, 2011 12:12 am
Location: UK
Contact:

Post by Full Tilt Boogie » Tue Aug 09, 2011 10:54 pm

[quote=""cnorman18""]
Full Tilt Boogie;246886 wrote:
cnorman18;246867 wrote:
Full Tilt Boogie;246863 wrote: As long as that's clear and understood from the outset.
Of course; but as I said, bias alone is irrelevant. Anyone who has an opinion on this subject could be said to be "biased," and that could be said about any subject at all. Atheists are biased against creationism; that doesn't make them wrong.
I'm happy to see how your wee tête-à-tête rolls out mate, is just that if you're entering a discussion in the knowledge that the subject matter is partial and biased towards, "The Case for Israel", then it rather risks being like reading a treatise written by a turkey on why Christmas and Thanksgiving should be abolished - unless you're prepared, during the course of the exchange, to acknowledge that bias.

Have at it. :)
You seem to keep implying that there's something inherently suspect about having an opinion about Israel -- or, more properly, a positive one. Tell me honestly -- would you be this concerned if the title of the book were "The Case Against Israel"?[/QUOTE]

Honestly mate, after three replies on this now, I find it kinda worrying that you keep trying to pull this into that territory. My concern has nothing to do with what you're suggesting. If you can't understand the imperative or need for impartiality in a discussion about Israel, then, with respect, you've already lost.

There is a certain aspect of intellectual honesty here which concerns me (perhaps because you've not yet explained the content or positions both sides will take in the debate) - you've said that you're going to talk about a book which is written by, on your own admission, an out-on-a-porch pro-Israel author - and given that (as Red Shirt said) in these situations, both sides usually take up opposing positions (for a debate to have any intellectual value) - and if you and Tom are merely going to vigorously agree, then I question the value of it. If that's not the case, then perhaps you need to be clearer as to who's taking what position - as neither have yet said they will be "opposing" the proposition (not that any proposition has been made clear yet).
"Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people." -- Eleanor Roosevelt

My Blog: Cosmic Navel Lint

User avatar
rog
Posts: 12712
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2010 2:21 pm
Location: UK

Post by rog » Tue Aug 09, 2011 11:00 pm

[quote=""rog""]I'm not a mod in this area but I can guess what they would say: This subforum is exclusively for arranging formal debates & exclusive engagements, any discussion of the actual issues should take place in an appropriate forum elsewhere on the board.[/quote]

FTB, ^^^ read ^^^

Full Tilt Boogie
Posts: 3855
Joined: Sun May 22, 2011 12:12 am
Location: UK
Contact:

Post by Full Tilt Boogie » Tue Aug 09, 2011 11:03 pm

[quote=""rog""]
rog;246894 wrote:I'm not a mod in this area but I can guess what they would say: This subforum is exclusively for arranging formal debates & exclusive engagements, any discussion of the actual issues should take place in an appropriate forum elsewhere on the board.
FTB, ^^^ read ^^^[/QUOTE]

Calm you engines mate, I was typing when you posted this so didn't see it.
"Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people." -- Eleanor Roosevelt

My Blog: Cosmic Navel Lint

Locked