A naughty person has cut and pasted as their own work a chpt of my The Great Philosophers on the internet without any acknowledgement or credit or permission. What to do...?
http://hubpages.com/hub/johnlocke
http://hubpages.com/hub/johnlocke
(Published in Faith and Philosophy 2011. Volume 28, Issue 2, April 2011. Stephen Law. Pages 129-151) EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS Stephen Law Abstract The vast majority of Biblical historians believe there is evidence sufficient to place Jesus’ existence beyond reasonable doubt. Many believe the New Testament documents alone suffice firmly to establish Jesus as an actual, historical figure. I question these views. In particular, I argue (i) that the three most popular criteria by which various non-miraculous New Testament claims made about Jesus are supposedly corroborated are not sufficient, either singly or jointly, to place his existence beyond reasonable doubt, and (ii) that a prima facie plausible principle concerning how evidence should be assessed – a principle I call the contamination principle – entails that, given the large proportion of uncorroborated miracle claims made about Jesus in the New Testament documents, we should, in the absence of indepen...
Comments
You don't say?! Haha
2. If that doesn't work, contact his server; and
3. If that doesn't work, give me a call and I will be happy to pursue the matter on a pro bono basis.
I have to run to work, so I was only able to make a cursory glance at the articles, but I can see that this guy also lifted your material on Plato, Bacon, Hobbs and James. As a person who makes his living by creating copyrighted material, this sort of thing infuriates me. The guy even makes introductory statements like, "I felt compelled to write this hub after discovering this philosopher inadvertently..." The website in question is a for-profit scheme, and this guy has stolen your work to draw traffic (i.e. revenue) to his site. Please make copies of all the relevant pages immediately and consult your lawyer.
I think maybe the reference to the Karamazov 'quote' could do with a little more discussion as it's been so apallingly hijacked erroneously in all kinds of fields, including humanists via Sartre.
Before you scream WORD COUNT! I really think the reference needs a bit more - just a few lines. I think the reader will be frustrated not to have more info but also you'd be doing us all a favour (not to mention Dostoevsky)!
Part of the novel's strategy is to show how dangerous irresponsible intellectualising like Ivan's can be. Dostoevsky makes Ivan say things to perniciously mislead other characters to show how evil, or at least wrongdoing, can be generated by people like Ivan playing with people's minds.
As you say, the 'quote line' is not spoken by Ivan at all. He pretends to conclude that there's no God, no morality (but later says he does believe in God - is this ambiguous?) What every reference to the 'quote' that I've come across fails to see is that Dostoevsky was a novelist - he orchestrated characters and story to make meaning of far greater complexity than a simplistic 'Does-God-exist-or-not?' soundbite. By the way, Shakespeare is the prime victim of this kind of lamentable ignorance of how fiction works which is why we have him hijacked onto pro-war waggons etc etc.
Thanks Mike. OK it's all with the publishers. I'm sure they will kick butt.
Pauline - OK I shall follow your advice on the Ivan matter...