GDG- Killing Lincoln
CWMHTours at aol.com
CWMHTours at aol.com
Sun Jan 15 21:46:34 CST 2012
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
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
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.
http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for Archives
More information about the Gettysburg