[Vision2020] Darrell putting Joe in a “bad light”

[Joe Campbell]

On Dec 3 19:32:52 Darrell wrote: “The sad part, Keely, is I did
nothing to put Joe in a bad light. I summarized my thoughts on the
quality of the just ended debate. My thoughts. Any reader that can
look over the preceding comments and make-up their own mind. If Joe
was put in a bad light he did it to himself.”

I know that people will just look back at the debate as one in which
two guys said some nasty things to each other. Yesterday we saw
Darrell's complaints about the things I said to him which turn out not
to be so nasty. Today I’ll merely share some quotes from Darrell and
you tell me whether he ever put me in a “bad light.”

Dec 1 18:11:24: “The above is simply an example of you attempting to
make a point by carrying it to an extreme.”

Dec 1 18:02:35: “When our discussion first began I was somewhat
excited. You are a professional philosopher, I reasoned that most
philosophers are highly intelligent folks. They’re accustomed to a
good debate, utilizing logic, providing and refuting evidence, etc.
Perhaps even using the Aristotelian forms of persuasion: ethos,
pathos, and logos. I did not expect your academic ‘A’ game, like Nick
provides. I hoped your strong academic and intellectual background
would lift your level of debate a few levels above the 'net norm. I
like a good debate. This sounded fun to me!

“Unfortunately I don't think you provided a good debate. I have
consistently provided points that you simply refused to acknowledge.
Instead you made a series of unsupported assertions and ad hominem
attacks, most of which you did not even acknowledge when your
attention was called to their faults. In your zeal to assert the
rightness of your position, or perhaps your consuming distaste for
Christ Church, you seem unwilling to sully yourself by acknowledging
the possibility of valid, moderate counterpoints. That is unfortunate,
as your dogmatic approach hurts your overall credibility in the
debate.

“I had hoped for better from a guy as obviously intelligent and
intellectually accomplished as you.”

Dec 1 00:17:15: “That was the point where you made at least 5
erroneous assertions about me. Assertions which were downright silly,
considering how little you know about me.”

Nov 28 16:42:16: “I do find it interesting how you feel free to make
accusations about me but are unwilling/able to back them up when
pressed (Too summarize for our viewership you have made four
unproven/untrue accusations about me: 1. I am unconcerned about these
local churches. 2. I have criticized people that are. 3. I am only
concerned about threatening remarks made about Christians. 4. I am a
Christian-I'll concede this point, I'm a Protestant.). That's a lot of
unwarranted assumptions you make about me.

“We all know what happens when you ass-u-me. Doesn't lead credence to
your other discussion points. I hope for better use of argumentation
and logic from a philosopher with such an awesome name.

“I've told you how I stand up for what I'm concerned about. I
volunteer and/or work for agencies that make a difference. Do you do
anything other than write and talk? Nott meant as a jab. I really am
curious, and suspect others on v2020 are too. I know it means more to
me when someone combines their talk with action.”