SJ>See above about "misrepresentations". You automatically assume a *moral*
>fault (ie. "misrepresentations") on my part, rather than merely an
>intellectual fault (ie. mistake).
I wasn't assuming a moral fault. I'm sorry you got that impression;
I apologize if others got that impression as well. I wanted to
explain why I thought that one-sentence summary did not properly
represent my actual views. I assumed there was a difference
of interpretation. (Check the dictionary ... one of the definitions
(not the one I meant) does describe the word as sometimes with intent
to deceive. Sorry. I guess I'll have to chose my words more carefully,
too.)
As for the rest: Perhaps you don't see a difference between what I
wrote and that one-sentence summary. I do. But the important thing is,
I think others who read such a summary, not written by me but with my
name attached, can easily come to wrong conclusions about my actual
views. Hence the general request to everyone, when summarizing views
not one's own, this problem can be mitigated by either leaving names
off, or by using direct quotes.
Loren Haarsma