Performs ao. Univ. Prof. Ulrich Berger a fanatic and self-righteous religious war, as claimed by GWUP.WATCH on 08.04.2009 (1) ? Are the "Society for Critical Thinking" and the club GWUP e. V. able to objectively, rationally and constructively deal with criticism? To address this issue today and in a new (just announced here first) blog posts.
Ao. Univ. Prof. Ulrich Berger and many of his club friends are masters of handing out, condemnation, polemical. They overwhelm the objects of their often fanatical religious war with scorn, malice, and partly justified, partly, however, unjustified and grossly exaggerated criticism. But if they are asked to give an account of the style of their criticism and the criteria of their sentences, they turn out regularly as oversensitive and criticism incompetent interlocutor.
So also in the controversy surrounding Ulrich Berger. Heinz Oberhummer , like Berger Member of the Society for Critical Thinking "and" skeptic "organization GWUP, is his friend in a club comment to help. Purely argumentative, he is either unable or unwilling to respond to specific arguments and details of the controversy. Oberhummer writes in his commentary:
"If, like Ulrich Berger reveals pseudo-science and mysticism, and this spread in a blog, science defends against such nonsense. Then turn the tables and those who defend the science, with fundamentalists compare, to put them as dogmatic and ideological conflicts that have a certain audacity. "has
Oberhummer expressed his binary thinking springing logic, that the act of" uncovering Age "Ulrich Berger in his view, makes immune to criticism. The question of whether a supposed "New Age-detection" may also spread even pseudo-science and in approaches is a charlatan is in Oberhummer not allowed, even as a "brazen" titled.
comes across with his argument, Heinz Oberhummer as a textbook-dogmatist. Dogmatism is defined as: "adjustment with its steep slope, views, the conflict of their own, strictly rejected without having the ability to use information to others for themselves. " In the case of Ulrich Berger, this means that a" skeptic "is by definition immune from criticism. A discussion of the style and the scientific basis of the supposed "New Age-uncovering" Berger is not allowed.
Instead of finally taking on the individual arguments of Berger's criticism of position, Upper lobster is seen in a third (for lack of reasonableness deleted) comment that responds again not a single word on the specific criticisms and instead using fundamental allegations and insults ends.
What does not create an astrophysicist Heinz Oberhummer either intellectually or emotionally (an objective, dispassionate discussion of the criticism of Ulrich Berger) catches up with another anonymous commentator after at least in part. He manifested that he is Prof. Stefan N. Willich and Esowatch Esoblog question or criticism of Ulrich Berger can not understand. This is a substantive and legitimate contribution to the discussion.
GWUP.WATCH declines in the next blog article comprehensively and with the necessary references to the issues raised in this comment questions.
.
About the Association GWUP eV:
ass Watch: wiki entry "GWUP"
.
0 comments:
Post a Comment