Yup.

See this. And then the next two articles after it.

Oh yes, he puts his foot in his mouth a lot, especially on twitter.

That case in point, he clearly isn’t reading many feminists. They talk about the 3rd world all the time. Some of the feminist writers here on our very blog network come from the 3rd world. Worse, to suggest they should give equal time to the societies they can’t affect as to the society they have to live in, is profoundly ignorant. That’s like saying “atheists will be taken seriously when they spend at least as much time criticizing abuses of church-state separation in the 3rd world as they do in the 1st.” That would be embarrassing for him to say, so obviously absurd would it be. Yet it’s saying essentially the same thing.

And there are more cases than just that.

Like Dawkins, he doesn’t realize twitter is a terrible medium for making nuanced arguments. And he too readily pronounces knowledge in subjects he has little studied and thought even less about.

My thoughts are to see if this can be changed. If it can’t, I’ll have to roll my eyes and write him off. But if it can, progress.

I disagree with this tweet from him however:
https://twitter.com/peterboghossian/status/494552950153306112
“Feminists will be taken seriously when they spend at least as much time criticizing abuses of women in the 3rd world as they do in the 1st.”

This shouldn’t make his other work invalid, it just bugs me. I assume you go through this with people who you respect on certain subjects. Do you have any thoughts on this issue?

It’s amusing that he straw mans my arguments sophomorically and then uses his sophomoric straw men to claim my arguments are sophomoric.

Own goal.

At any rate, the direct link to the review of your book is here:

http://aremonstrantsramblings.wordpress.com/2013/08/07/an-analysis-of-richard-carriers-why-i-am-not-a-christian-part-2/

regards

I don’t follow your point. Is he talking about actual college courses? Which are prohibitively expensive and not even physically accessible to most people (who don’t live near a university, much less the one he is talking about, or any that offer comparable courses).

And he rambles too much on side issues to get anything like an efficient critique of the book. I don’t see that as a useful reference. Unless someone has days and days to spend wading through it all and comparing it to the book. And even then you’d get better results by then asking any remaining questions you have after doing that to the instructors in Carrier-Boghossian.

P.S. If you want to send the exact link to his critique of my book, feel free to do that here. I won’t necessarily write a rebuttal (there are zillions of these things, most are not worth the bother of addressing, because the book already refutes them as written). But I can take a look to see if it would be worth any bother.

However it might be of interest to teacher and students to take a look at a multi-part series written by a Christian apologist/philosopher supposedly taking apart Boghossian’s book. I have not yet read “The Manual” so cannot testify to the validity of his counter-argument (the specific book-review posts are easy to find via the “Peter Boghossian” cloud tag)

http://aremonstrantsramblings.wordpress.com/

Incidentally I just discovered in confirming his site that he also recently added an analysis of your arguments in “Why I am not a Christian.”