----- Original Message -----
From: "Baardwijk, J. van DTO/SLBD/BGM/SVM/SGM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 3:36 AM
Subject: RE: Landmines RE: US Foreign Policy Re: *DO* we share a
civilization?
> > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> > Van: Dan Minette [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Verzonden: Thursday, August 16, 2001 6:22 AM
> > Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Onderwerp: Re: Landmines RE: US Foreign Policy Re: *DO* we share a
> > civilization?
>
> > Gautam cited two ways of acquiring an understanding: formal study or
> > actively performing the task, and you said that someone can acquire
> > knowledge without going to school. Can someone acquire knowledge
> > without formal study or without actually doing the job?
> >
> > Well, possibly. However, that person's knowledge is untested. So, it
> > is less likely that the person understands the requirements than
> > someone who has either studied or worked in the area.
>
> Given the number of years mr. Rossiter has devoted to this subject, I
think
> we can safely assume that he has acquired sufficient knowledge to properly
> judge the situation.
What subject did he devote years to? Did he devote it to the study of war,
or to documenting the civilian casualties of land mines? Did he devote his
time to documenting the random ways that many combatants use land mines, or
studying the techniques of warfare? How familiar is he with the pluses and
minus of the various armaments?
Compare that to Gautam's sources, including two colonels who had been to
Korea to be briefed on the subject who convinced him to change his mind on
mines. It is probable that they have access to data that he doesn't.
This doesn't prove him wrong, it just indicates that in weighing sources,
his lack of data and lack of demonstrated skill in determining the force
necessary to repel an invasion in less than 40 miles is considered a minus.
> I think that all those years certainly qualify as
> "studying and working in the area" -- even if he has never been close to a
> minefield.
>
Well, I've seen utter nonsense put out by people "studying and working in an
area" without any formal training or responsibilities in an area. An
example of this is an anti-nuclear "expert" who became an expert by reading
scores of books on the subject claimed that material exposed to a low energy
gamma ray source becomes radioactive.
> Compare this to your religious life. You are religious, you seem to know
> quite a lot about it, and you've devoted lots of time to your church. Yet,
> you are not a priest. Does that mean that, despite devoting all that time
to
> religious matters, you are not qualified to make educated comments about
it?
>
>
Well, the answer to this will not be what you want. I have had formal
education in religion. I aced a second year graduate course in Persian and
Hellenistic Judaism. Yet, I am very careful in not claiming too much when
discussing scripture interpretation with my daughter who is about to
graduate in theology and go on to seminary. I know she has had formal
training in areas where I have not, including two semesters of Greek.
Also, I wouldn't dream of flatly saying our pastors don't understand the
theology of pastoral care or the polity of the church. If I had doubts, I
might ask questions or state "I have read that this is a common
understanding, can you tell me why you differ with that?" But, I would be
aghast if someone quoted me to debunk what one of our pastors states. That's
even true even though I'm an ordained ruling elder of my church.
Dan M.
