CRAIG BLOMBERG SAID:
“The policy on inclusive-language was created over 20 years ago in the late 1980's when 2/3 of the faculty were complementarians. I don't know of anyone today who actually penalizes students for not following the policy as a few did 20 years ago. We just encourage students to follow it and be sensitive to their brothers and sisters. If bloggers wouldn't jump to assumptions of things they have no way of actually knowing, then there wouldn't need to be so many retractions…Truth truly does divide when the ones being divided from are as quick to state unfounded opinions as truth without checking up on them as you folks are [emphasis mine].”
http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2009/10/speech-codes.html#5945505826871314639
“Here are the standards I [Douglas Groothuis] give my students for their papers for me…The Denver Seminary Student Handbook stipulates that you must use inclusive language. Do not use ‘mankind,’ ‘man,’ etc., when you are referring to both women and men. Papers not consistently using inclusive language will be downgraded one-half grade. For help in this matter see ‘Guidelines for Non-sexist Use of Language’ from the American Philosophical Association [emphasis mine].”
http://theconstructivecurmudgeon.blogspot.com/2009/09/tips-for-writing-philosophy-papers.html
I hear the author of the constructive curmudgeon is not a trustworthy source.
ReplyDeleteDon't take Blomberg's word, but do take Blomberg's word.
Comment has been blocked.
CRAIG BLOMBERG SAID:
ReplyDelete“Further proof of jumping to completely wrong conclusions gratuitously: The policy on inclusive-language was created over 20 years ago in the late 1980's when 2/3 of the faculty were complementarians. As I recall it was approved by the faculty unanimously. If anything, feelings were higher in those days than they are now. That's what makes it so curious that somebody would dredge this up and speak of it as a sign of us deteriorating.”
http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2009/10/speech-codes.html#5945505826871314639
But in a different venue he said:
“Yes, under Craig Williford, especially up until about 2006, it might have been fair to say that the issue [of gender] was starting to become a little bit of a pet issue, though some events led him to back off somewhat from it during the last two years of his presidency. Under Mark Young, who starts with us July 1, while none of us expects any changes to our lack of formal doctrinal statement one way or the other, I don't expect it to be any high profile issue at all. I still am thrilled that ours is one of the rare environments where complementarians and egalitarians can get along well, debate vigorously, and go away friends, however, and I don't expect this to change.”
http://www.denverseminary.edu/article/the-gender-neutral-bible-controversy/
Seems like more has been going on behind the scenes, as late as 2006, than his dismissive statement to me would lead the reader to suspect.
Comment has been blocked.
Comment has been blocked.
I really don't know what is going on here, but while I do encourage students to use inclusive language, I do not downgrade papers that do not.
ReplyDeleteComment has been blocked.
Since when is "mankind" or "man" or, for that matter "sheep" and "deer" not inclusive?
ReplyDeleteSomeone needs an English lesson methinks.
So maybe Paul said to Timothy "I don't allow a person to teach or have authority over a person." ???
"Someone needs an English lesson methinks."
ReplyDeleteAmen to that. Man and mankind are perfectly good English words. Leftist wackoids are the ones who have proceeded to castrate the English language in our culture. Why should we capitulate to their demands?
Steve,
ReplyDeleteRegarding the recent posts about Denver Seminary's inclusivist language policy:
An older version of their handbook which used to be online here stated:
"students and faculty alike are required to use inclusive language in writing."
In an interaction with Groothuis online in May of 2007, M. Hutchens mentioned that Denver Seminary was a school where "students and faculty are required to use inclusive language in writing” and cited as his source the 2006-2007 Student Handbook, p. 51.
(see the discussion here)
Groothuis admitted this and responded: "Yes, we require inclusive language; that is merely polite and appropriate. Our non-egalitarians, such as Dr. Craig Blomberg, agree with this."
Note the word "require." Perhaps this policy has changed in the past two years. But clearly the inclusivist language was required until recently.
Michael Marlowe
Comment has been blocked.
Comment has been blocked.