Saw “The Post” recently. Highly recommend it! It speaks not only to the past (the Nixon years) but resonates with today as well. Katharine Graham is the first female publisher of a major American newspaper — The Washington Post. With help from editor Ben Bradlee, Graham races to catch up with The New York Times to expose a massive cover-up of government secrets that spans three decades and four U.S. presidents. Together, they must overcome their differences as they risk their careers — and very freedom — to help bring long-buried truths to light.
Many liberties were taken in “The Post,” the Steven Spielberg movie on the publishing of the Pentagon Papers. But the movie stuck to reality when it described how the Supreme Court sided with the press and not the Nixon administration in what was a cliffhanger of a legal battle. It’s worth reading Justice Hugo Black’s triumphant words at the CORNELL LAW SCHOOL »
The next Philosophers’ Café is Wednesday. Mark your calendars and join in on the fun as Dr. Laura Shanner, researcher and consultant in health care ethics, leads you through a discussion on lifesaving interventions.
Philosophers’ Café: How Far Should We Go to Save a Life?
Wednesday, Nov. 22nd, 6:30-7:30 pm
Nanaimo Harbourfront Library
International Blasphemy Day has just past. Watch this inspiring video made by ex-Muslims in various countries:
The Future Belongs to Blasphemers.
Also see the world’s first group bodypaint captured by both ground and drone in solidarity with ex-Muslims.
Some will ask why we must celebrate blasphemy when it is “hurtful” and “offends”.
The answer is simple:
Because people can be killed for blaspheming and human life is more important than hurt sensibilities and offence.
As the Jordanian atheist, Mohammed Al Khadra said at the largest gathering of ex-Muslims in history, “Where are your priorities? While we die, you are all thinking about Islamophobia?“
Islamophobia is a political term used to scaremonger people into silence; it imposes de facto blasphemy and apostasy laws where none exist. Where such laws exist, there are no accusations of “Islamophobia” but rather imprisonment, persecution and execution.
John Opgaard solved this puzzle in a few seconds! Many, including me, got it wrong at first. Solution later.
Informal Logic invites submissions for a special issue on “Reason & Rhetoric in the Time of Alternative Facts”. This issue aims to analyze, explain, and critique instances of argumentation connected to the campaign, election, and presidency of Donald Trump, as well as associated issues such as the concept of “post-truth” emerging from the Brexit campaigns. We believe that argumentation theory can help in forming answers to some of the questions that events around the new U.S. president open-up.
Trump has adopted a distinctive approach to argumentation that is especially worth studying now that it is stemming from the highest political office in the United States. In terms of both form and content, the written and verbal argumentation coming from the current president, as well as official White house communications—including the whitehouse.gov website— constitute rich material to engage argumentation scholars. Equally interesting are, for example, issues surrounding the way the press deals/dealt with and reacts to the new president and the argumentative and rhetorical choices made by his adversaries during and after the presidential campaign.
This issue of Informal Logic welcomes contributions from both theorizers and practitioners in the expanding field of argumentation studies, including, but not limited to, scholars in Informal Logic, Rhetoric, Pragma-Dialectics, Communication Studies, and Critical Thinking.
DEADLINE: September 1, 2017
See the full call, including submission guidelines, HERE
The guest editors are happy to answer any questions that might arise.
Katharina Stevens & Michael Baumtrog:
email@example.com / firstname.lastname@example.org
Early Bird registration open now.
For group discounts for your organisation, please write to email@example.com