Hi, my name is Apolonio Latar III. I’m a has-been wunderkind.
I would like to give my fellow vassals of Rome a few tips on how to do Catholic apologetics in case you ever bump into a James White at the supermarket.
1.Add some Roman numerals to the end of your name. Makes you look like the heir apparent to the throne of Luxembourg.
2.Master the fine art of name-dropping. Buy a deck of flash cards. Write down the names of every philosopher you can Google. Philosophers with French surnames are best. Dead French philosophers are even better.
With practice, I’m able to rattle off the names of 20 dead French philosophers in 10 seconds flat.
3.Parenthetically mention that you attend a top-rated college—even if you college is number 29,303 on the list.
4.Parenthetically mention that you know a friend of a friend who’s the step-dad of the foster brother of the second cousin of Saul Kripke’s Great-Aunt Mae.
5.Put a sidebar on your blog in which you list all the coffee table books you’re currently pretending to read. Philosophical authors with French surnames are best. The deader the better.
I use the dust-jackets from Foucault for my Marvel Comics collection whenever I’m reading the latest issue of the Hulk in Ernest Sosa’s class.
6.Drop into Triablogue when Steve Hays does something on Catholicism, and post a one-liner in the combox to instantly refute his 40-page analysis of Al Kimel or Jonathan Prejean.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete"The deader the better"
ReplyDeleteYes, clear intellectual superiority. Of course, French philosophers aren't half so useful alive...
I think this is pretty funny of this guy
ReplyDeleteI think the first one was actually the funniest. The reason why I put III is because my cousin is the IV and people can be confused. "Apolonio Latar" actually refers to two people and putting III would make it clear that it refers to me.
ReplyDelete2 was eh. I don't really like french philosophers much. I don't even know why you used the example of french philosophers either.
3 is ehhh. Again, most of the philosophers I have studied with are top notch. Is Dean Zimmerman an example of an inept philosopher?
4 is funny.
5 is eh. Again, i don't know why french philosophers are used. I'm actually not that fond of them. And I think most French philosophers don't like analytic philosophy either.
Oh God, I would never read a comic book in Sosa's class. It's the best class I had.
6. I use one-liners for those that I don't see any value in. I put my comments on those that I see has some.
Oh and by the way, you might want to check out Alvin Goldman's new forthcoming paper "Epistemic Relativism and Reasonable Disagreement". Go to part 5. See who he quotes. Not bad huh? One of the most prominent epistemologists in the last 20 to 30 years quoting an undergrad paper...again, not bad huh? Maybe you can attempt to be funny with that one.
We know Steve is funny, but that's no reason to call him God.
ReplyDeleteProverbs 27:2 seems relevant to Apolonio's posting style.
ReplyDeleteDon't break your arm patting yourself on the back there, Apolonio. Perhaps we should question Goldman's creds?
ReplyDeletehostus..
ReplyDeleteOh yeah go question his creds, go ahead. LOL
Here is what Bill Alston said, "Especially in epistemology, there is no one from whom I have learned more..." (Perspectives on the Philosophy of William P. Alston pg. 137).
But don't take his word for granted. I'd like to see you question his creds
Wow, Bill Alston said that? Well, clearly I stand corrected.
ReplyDeleteLet me rephrase that then, Goldman, if he's quoting one of your papers, may be slipping...
There once was a student named Latar,
ReplyDeleteWho sang to himself on his sitar;
He sang his own praises,
In vainglorious phrases,
And scribbled them down in his memoir.
BTW, I just ran across a picture of Latar from his High School yearbook:
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Michelangelo_Caravaggio_065.jpg
hostus,
ReplyDeletehave you even read the part where he quotes me? and ernie sosa loved my paper on epistemic disagreement. plantinga said my argument sounded good to him as well. goldman, sosa, and plantinga...not bad huh?
oh and i dont think goldman is slipping. his view on epistemic relativism and objectivism is pretty good. agree with it or not, he's doing some nice work on this.
steve,
i actually liked the first four lines. i thought you could've finished it better though.
Not bad Apolonio, not bad. Perhaps you could hire a choir to sing your praises. Maybe you missed where the Bible says not to praise yourself? (Prov. 27:2)
ReplyDeleteAnyway, Congrats! You've arrived...