tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657288.post112603560173448617..comments2024-01-07T06:59:04.212-05:00Comments on The Playgoer: Greenblatt respondsPlaygoerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02994724588504353485noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657288.post-81091766110169963692013-03-27T17:37:45.048-04:002013-03-27T17:37:45.048-04:00It is disappointing to see that the prejudice ref...It is disappointing to see that the prejudice reflected in Professor's Greenblatt's remarks is on your blog sustained not only by affirmation but, apparently, by the censorship of contrary opinions. I recommend the recent documentary by First Folio Pictures, Last Will. and Testament (http://www.firstfoliopictures.com/),which will help to place Dr. Greenblatt's gratuitous remarks in appropriate historical and intellectual context. If you'd like to discuss the contents of the documentary I'm sure that there would interest in doing so. <br /><br />Best Regards,<br /><br />Dr. Roger Stritmatter<br />Associate Professor<br />Coppin State Universitydoc stritmatterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08505890938637513080noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657288.post-1126206215229714112005-09-08T15:03:00.000-04:002005-09-08T15:03:00.000-04:00I'm with you on the main points, and I agree with ...I'm with you on the main points, and I agree with the quotation from Brian Vickers on all but a few words. It's not only "faiths" that "cannot be proved false." The notion of falsifiability is useful in deciding whether a theory is scientific (in Sir Karl Popper's precise and somewhat restricted sense of the word); it's not concerned with the semantic difference between a theory and a faith. A number of theories to which we otherwise lend credence may still be unfalsifiable; an example is psychodynamic theories of the mind and mental functioning, which aren't fully scientific (in Popper's view).<BR/><BR/>By the way, the criterion of falsifiability might raise problems for both sides of the argument about whether Shakespeare wrote his plays. (I don't know enough of the details to say.) It should be enough just to follow common sense (as well as tradition and the principle of Occam's razor) and accept the simpler, more obvious explanation.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657288.post-1126110467756934612005-09-07T12:27:00.000-04:002005-09-07T12:27:00.000-04:00No, I haven't read Shapiro, but am keen to! His "...No, I haven't read Shapiro, but am keen to! His "Shakespeare and the Jews" is full of great revelations.Playgoerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02994724588504353485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657288.post-1126039826610925702005-09-06T16:50:00.000-04:002005-09-06T16:50:00.000-04:00Readers: rest assured, the above "deletions" do no...Readers: rest assured, the above "deletions" do not reflect a sudden flurry of obscene Oxfordian attacks. (If only!) Just some annoying "blog spam," a distressing recent phenomenon. Is no one safe!Playgoerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02994724588504353485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657288.post-1126036900392382972005-09-06T16:01:00.000-04:002005-09-06T16:01:00.000-04:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657288.post-1126036752183495362005-09-06T15:59:00.000-04:002005-09-06T15:59:00.000-04:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com