GDG- Killing Lincoln

CWMHTours at aol.com CWMHTours at aol.com
Sun Jan 15 21:46:34 CST 2012


Excellent post.
 
Thank you.
 
When you stop ROFL let me know.  Thank Gawd it is not  ROFLMAO.
 
I like to think that I am blessed with access to the facts but  I am trying 
to also not bring up religion in here, along with politix and  sex.
 
I kind of believe that we all have access to the facts and  should make up 
our own minds.
 
But then this is turning into a real bodice  ripper.
 
"Just  the facts, ma'am." 

Your Most Obediant Servant
Peter  

 
In a message dated 1/15/2012 10:31:20 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
bob at segtours.com writes:

Esteemed  GDG Member Contributes:
On 1/15/2012 8:58 PM, CWMHTours at aol.com  wrote:
> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
> Is there a difference  between evidence and facts?

ROFL.  Only in the sense that they are  completely different things.

> Two people can witness the same  traffic accident and give  different
> stories of it.  The  different stories in no way alters the events  of the
>  accident.

And 147 years later, how could you presume to know what are  "the events 
of the accident" or whether some book that is written about it  is 
accurate?  What could possible be your foundation - other than  what you 
are told by those witnesses or other people?  That is  evidence.  Those 
are not facts.

Looking at things in black and  white as you do, you must admit that at 
least one of the witnesses is  wrong since their stories are different. 
But since one can be wrong, can't  both be wrong?  And if so, would you 
know that?  And now there's  grey.

The facts are lost to time and the best that you can hope to do  is to 
approximate them by the careful evaluation of available  evidence.  Other 
people will do the same and they may or may not  agree with your 
conclusions -- maybe because they have access to different  evidence or 
because their standards of interpreting and evaluating the  evidence are 
different than yours.

I've said that "Killing Lincoln"  doesn't meet my personal standards of 
evidence.  I don't claim to  know what happened but I do know that the 
book didn't change my mind about  anything.  Recognizing that _every_ 
book is a collection of somebody  else's conclusions, I am relieved of 
the burden of being offended when I  don't agree with the author.  When 
that happens, I shrug my  shoulders, smile, and move on, still able to be 
entertained by a good  story -- and appreciating it for whatever degree 
to which it attracts new  people to the subject matter.  I have faith in 
their ability to  evaluate the evidence too.

Assuming you've read it, you're entitled to  your conclusions about the 
book too.  But to defend your criticisms  on the grounds that you are 
blessed with access to the _facts_ is  ridiculous.

-Bob

----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.com
  -to unsubscribe
http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for  Archives




More information about the Gettysburg mailing list