Criticisms are residue from king of the hill games and Curt’s research methods.

Jan 29, 2020, 9:03 PM

(Selected Bill Joslin Notes on Curt’s Methods and His Critics)

Many criticisms are residue from king of the hill games and Curt’s research methods.

Curt will take a position and argue it, just to cause debate. Then through the subsequent “battles” the ideas that survive tend to be correct. He then goes away and refines them then comes back.

His stance now is that christian ethics are scientific – the notion of P prosecuting Christians stems from their misunderstanding that testimonialism pertains to all and any speech acts – it applies to public speech acts (speaking to the public about matters public) not a private community or each other.

Many jump off the train outraged if they don’t understand how P is developed: by public argument.

That fits Curts teaching style – the jargon stems from e-prime.

To avoid God like proclamations often requires pulling in “just the right term”. Then what happens is an operational argument becomes a definition elsewhere (one word or phrase to reference the argument). Overtime a “terms of art” has evolved.

The main hurdle to P is e-prime. From there definitions. Then, where I’m at, is general knowledge.

Edit