Re: [Fwd: Re: 7 years old Iranian genius]

[Andrew Wayne Austin <aaustin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, 1 May 1999, Katha Pollitt wrote:

>I don't believe this seven year old has an "in-depth" understanding of
>the text, unless the text is so simple a seven year old can understand
>it.

How can somebody miss a simple point by so huge a margin? Is the boy going
by murdered before he becomes an adult? Biography is relevant here. My
father was a Christian theologian. Knowing the Bible so well was a major
part of my atheism, as well as my ability to debate Christians in their
domain. Yes, little boys grow up.

>As to whether an in-depth understanding" puts you in a better position
>to criticize the text... sure maybe.  but it seems a roundabout way to
>go.

Having an in-depth understanding of a text is a roundabout way to go when
criticizing a text? No wonder Katha's writing is so shallow.

>Face it: this kid is being primed for imam-hood just the way  Marjo,
>the child fundamentalist televangelist, was primed since birth for that.

And didn't Marjo make a major score with his expose of fundamentalist
Christianity? Marjo is a case in point. Thanks for handing me the
exemplar for my argument. (Maybe Katha missed Marjo.)

>marxists who make their kids memorize the C manifesto are similarly out
>of their minds. never heard of this, actually.

What about parents who make their kids memorize the Jabberwocky? or Green
Eggs and Ham?

Maybe Katha thinks kids ought not learn to memorize anything.

Andy