Dear Dave, 
I support you on your decision as I'm equally sick of this group being monopolised by this protracted antagonism, most of which ultimately provides little insight into the study of magic. 
If you choose to allow these two combatants back on the list, please do me the favour of removing my name. I rarely contribute, mostly because of the paucity of anything really about magic. Azal and Segal both sound like they are knowledgeable but apparently prefer being gladiators. Not my kind of arena, I'm afraid.
All good fortune with the group,
Peter

Sent from my iPad

On 27 Jan 2013, at 20:56, "OLUWATOYIN ADEPOJU" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

David,

Why dont you make this a last warning?

I would miss Azal's advocacy of Islamic learning and Segal's championing of the Western model of learning as he understands it, if I could sum up my understanding of their contributions quickly.

I would also suggest that such squabbles should be tolerated as long as they dont degenerate to outright insults. Others can call the participants to order but the natural character of human interaction, which is not always at a high level, should be allowed to take its course. 

toyin

On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 4:44 PM, David Green <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Dear NW and Robert,
 
Whilst you might be lovely people off-list, but I am utterly sick of your pompous, point-scoring public squabbles and the effect it has on this list. You might both have a list of credentials and qualifications as long as the human genome (almost as long as my patience), but you both really need to grow up and 'grow a pair'.  Consider yourself deleted.
 
Best Wishes,
 
Dave
 
Dr Dave Green
 
Senior Lecturer in Sociology, University of the West of England, Bristol, UK
 
Society for the Academic Study of Magic (SASM): https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC
 
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=653230719
 

From: Society for The Academic Study of Magic [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of N.W. Azal [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 26 January 2013 15:57

To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] Can non-europeans think (link)

And I suppose the published literature in the West on the subject of Islamic magic going back to the 19th century (cited here in the past) -- and one most recently by Noah Gardiner who is on this list, and an outstanding piece too (his concluding remarks are most apropos here) -- is stale pc in your perspective.

Dr. Siegal, you do not know what you are talking about outside of your own narrow field as well as your specific, circumscribed cultural lens. A real scholar, not to mention a real gentleman, would have no problems conceding this. You, on the other hand, appear to have a chip on your shoulder whenever people have pointed out the blatantly obvious.

There is no blame in the fact that you don't know about a certain subject area. No one can be infallible. But you react viscerally to the fact that there can be something outside of your specific field of discussion regarding a subject matter such as magic -- and this is a problem which is institutional and very pervasive, and which you echo.

Goodbye to you too.


On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Segal, Professor Robert A. <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
My final comment for sure:

You read everything as racist.   I was asking, as I would of anyone who claims that some pet figure was ignored in a book or article, just what was being missed.   This response happens repeatedly and has nothing to do with race or geography.   Of course, no book or article is exhaustive, and reviewers and referees often point out what might have been included.   I do this myself.   But what the distinctive POSITION that the excluded figure holds is the real issue.   I cannot put this point any more clearly, and I am sorry that you have yet to grasp it.

The associates of yours who tell you that my work is unimpressive hold what endowed professorships in what top universities.   And you yourself?   Why not tell us all exactly what book or article I have written that fails to meet your standards and exactly why not?   I await your professional assessment.

In any other discussion list with which I am familiar, ad hominem invective like yours would not be posted.

I have in fact been exceedingly restrained, but I am not intimidated by stale, embittered, unproven attacks on anyone who refuses to accept some p c position that has long ceased to be trendy.   I deal in arguments and evidence.

Goodbye.


Robert Segal
________________________________________
From: Society for The Academic Study of Magic [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of N.W. Azal [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 3:30 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] Can non-europeans think (link)

I have checked your cv. You don't impress me at all. And given your history of acerbic, caustic responses to people whenever they questioned you on important matters, you are not a man of honor to debate anything with; nor as far as I know are you taken all that seriously by scholars who are actually working in the field whom I know -- despite what you may believe about yourself otherwise.

As for your accusation about racism: given your documented ethnocentric and Islamophobic statements made on this list to me and others, take a look in the mirror. This pompous and ignorant statement also demonstrates the issue quite well and merely reinforces what I said in general previously, "...tell us just what was novel in any of the non-Western writers on magic you were touting..."


On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 3:48 PM, Segal, Professor Robert A. <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
Check my cv.   I don't answer to you.

At the same time you continually misread things.   I didn't claim expertise on my part but on the part of the editors of DEFINING MAGIC.    But then the publisher asked me for an endorsement, so that I guess that I am seen by some as having some expertise.

You were asked by me weeks ago to tell us just what was novel in any of the non-Western writers on magic you were touting.   Still working on that information?   Your statements that non-Westerners were shamefully being overlooked was your sole argument--an ad hominem argument, and one ultimately racist itself, that carries no weight among scholars.   So I replied more than once to you.

I have no interest in any more exchanges with you.


RS
________________________________________
From: Society for The Academic Study of Magic [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On Behalf Of N.W. Azal [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>]
Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 1:13 PM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] Can non-europeans think (link)

But debating on the basis of knowledge is, to use a rather out-of-date line, what separates the men from the boys.

Indeed. But could I ask what you have actually written about magic on any serious level which places you among the men and not the boys?

On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 1:26 PM, Segal, Professor Robert A. <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]><mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>> wrote:
Jan. 26

Dear Mogg,

The Presocratics versus Homeric gods?   Plato versus Homeric gods?  The Stoics saving Homeric gods only through allegory?

I appreciate your prior message, which was most cordial.

I love debating.   That is being scholarly, not unscholarly.   But debating on the basis of knowledge is, to use a rather out-of-date line, what separates the men from the boys.


Best,

Robert
________________________________________
From: Society for The Academic Study of Magic [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]><mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>] On Behalf Of mandrake [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]><mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>]
Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 12:18 PM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]><mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Subject: Re: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] Can non-europeans think (link)

Dear Friends

It is not unscholarly to debate and ask questions.

Although in your latest one too many for me - although
one caught my eye -
the conflict "religion versus science":

There is no conflict between pagan religion and science
but there was a conflict in Europe between Christian religion  and
(pagan?) science ?

(I note that some openly Christian astronomers and historians of science
have been trying to argue the opposite)

senebty

Mogg Morgan


> Jan. 26
>
> Dear Nick,
>
> Many thanks for your fast reply.
>
> Obviously, I agree with you.
>
> I know well Christian polemics against Greco-Roman pagans and vice versa.   I wonder what our experts, whose academic credentials are obscure, think of Justin Martyr, who was beheaded by Rome for his polemics against pagan philosophers.
>
> It does not take a specialist to be aware of divisions within the "European" realm.    Since, as you note, "Abrahamic" includes Islam, what do our authorities make of the Crusades?   An intra-mural squabble?   What do they make of religious persecutions throughout the history of "Europe"?   What of the conflict between religion and science?  What of philosophical conflicts--for example, between materialism and idealism?
>
> Yes, the list could be most useful if it were scholarly.   I especially like the publicizing of publications and of conferences that might otherwise pass me by.    And subscribers who ask for references or other guides--this is what the list should be doing.
>
>
> Best,


The University of Aberdeen is a charity registered in Scotland, No SC013683.



The University of Aberdeen is a charity registered in Scotland, No SC013683.



The University of Aberdeen is a charity registered in Scotland, No SC013683.




--
Compcros
Comparative Cognitive Processes and Systems
"Exploring Every Corner of the Cosmos in Search of Knowledge"