Talk:Richard Carrier/Archive 1

message: "Claiming to be a philosopher with a doctorate degree, however, has prevented Mr. Carrier from being taken seriously in academic circles."
I removed the above as there is no cite for this view. I have no problem with dissenting information being included but it looks more of a personal comment so without a reference it shouldn't stay in the article. SophiaTalkTCF 18:18, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Uncited comment

message: Richard Carrier has no doctorate in history nor any other outstanding accomplishments to give him the title of historian. --24.75.30.114 20:34, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Where does it say one must have a doctorate in order to have the title of historian? This is were your premise is false.Giovanni33 04:03, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  I removed the title of historian from Richard Carrier's bio 

message: I do not know what the Wiki standards are for justifying calling someone a historian or a philosopher in their bio. If someone can provide or explain those standards then I can provide the necessary quals if I have them. For now, regarding "historian" I have a B.A., M.A., and M.Phil. in history, all from accredited universities (Berkeley and Columbia, respectively), I have contributed three chapters to a published book on a historical subject (The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond the Grave), my work on historical subjects has been accepted for presentation at two university conferences (at Berkeley and Columbia, references provided in my cv below), I wrote several entries for a published reference in history, the Encyclopedia of the Ancient World (s.v. Epicurus, Lucretius, Philodemus, Second Sophistic, Soranus of Ephesus), and my work has been published in at least one peer reviewed journal: my study on Hitler's Table Talk was published in German Studies Review and is already cited as an authoritative reference on that source by a qualified historian in Hitler studies (Richard Steigmann-Gall, The Holy Reich: Nazi Conceptions of Christianity, 1919-1945, citation on p. 253, n. 178). Though I think all that qualifies me as a historian, if a Ph.D. is deemed necessary for the title, then that will arrive in due course as I am presently working on same.
As for the title of philosopher, I have never claimed to have any degrees specifically on that subject, though I have degrees in intellectual history (noted above and in my cv below), I have published a book on philosophy (Sense and Goodness without God: A Defense of Metaphysical Naturalism) and I have published several articles on the subject of philosophy in peer reviewed journals (in Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines, The History Teacher, and Biology and Philosophy, references provided in my cv below).
For one's judgment, my full curriculum vitae is available here.
RichardCarrier 01:01, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Providing Credentials? 

message: Richard Carrier has no widely respected book on history and Richard Carrier has no doctorate in history.  Richard Carrier is not a historian. --192.135.227.226 17:11, 23 May 2006  (UTC)
:Where does it say one must have a doctorate in order to have the title of historian? This is were your premise is false. Giovanni33 04:03, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  No widely respected book on history and no doctorate in history - not a historian 

message: I really don't see any academic credentials or outstanding accomplishments recognized by philosophers to warrant calling Richard Carrier a philosopher. --192.135.227.226 17:14, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a bit of a red herring and straw man since no one has made the claim in the article that Richard is a philosopher of outstanding accmplishments. That is a POV that may or may not be true but its besides the point. Outstanding accomplishments are not required to be a known as a philosopher. I think the title is apropos given the evidence that we have rearding the thinker published works in philosphy. He has a published a book on philosophy (Sense and Goodness without God: A Defense of Metaphysical Naturalism) and he has published several articles on the subject of philosophy in peer reviewed journals (in Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines, The History Teacher, and  Biology and Philosophy.So, if you don't see any academic credentials, then this also is of no import because they exist regardless if you see them or not. And, I do assume good faith that you simply do not see them.Giovanni33 04:39, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  I removed the title of philosopher from Richard Carrier's bio 

message: Since the bio never stated I had a doctorate in history, that is not a valid reason for removing the title "historian." Whether my "accomplishments" have been "outstanding" in any sense is an unverifiable opinion and therefore not a valid reason for removing the title "historian." That The Empty Tomb and The Encyclopedia of the Ancient World are not "widely respected" is an unverifiable opinion and therefore not a valid reason for removing the title "historian." 
Nor should being "widely respected" even be a criterion required to verify the claim "Richard Carrier is a historian." I have advanced degrees in history and have worked as a historian (I've actually made money writing and teaching history and have spoken at professional conferences on history) and I have published peer reviewed work in history that other historians cite. That should count as verifying the claim that I am a "historian" and Wiki standards only require information to be verifiable. I ask someone to edit my bio according to actual Wiki standards and not biased hostility toward me.
Regarding the claim that I am a philosopher, Wiki standards only require that claim to be verifiable. No claim has been made that I have "academic credentials" in philosophy or "outstanding accomplishments" recognized by philosophers, therefore the lack of those things has no bearing on whether "Richard Carrier is a philosopher" is verifiable. I believe that having published a book on philosophy and having published papers on philosophy in peer reviewed philosophy journals verifies the claim that I am a philosopher. Again, I ask someone to edit my bio according to actual Wiki standards and not biased hostility toward me.
RichardCarrier 20:00, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with your arguments above, and have restored the removed material.Giovanni33 04:40, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Verifiable vs. Unverifiable Claims 

message: The categories are there to help readers find articles - they do not imply any qualifications and you do not need to have a Ph.D in the areas to be added to the categories - see WP:CAT and WP:CGZ.  Sophia 23:10, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm reminded that Ayn Rand is generally considered a philosopher despite her notable lack of academic credentials.  If she qualifies, Carrier more than qualifies; end of story. Al 04:51, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point. Ayn Rand certainly lacks any outstanding achievements in philosophy and is lacking academic credentials, yet, she is allowed the title of philosopher given that she does articulate a philosphy in her writings on the subject.Giovanni33 04:42, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: categories

message: Richard Carrier has no doctorate in history.   Also, I would ask which historians have cited the book "The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond The Grave" published by Prometheus books (Richard Carrier is said to have written three chapters of this book).   ken 02:31, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ken, it's been pointed out that this is entirely irrelevant, so I don't see why anyone should address it further.  Thank you for understanding. Al 04:52, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Richard Carrier's lack of a history book cited by historians 

message: Do any reference works list Richard Carrier as a philosopher or historian?  I don't believe any do.   The reason I believe that this is the case is that he has no doctorate in philosophy or history and has produced no notable works in these areas.   Richard Carrier is a graduate student who has yet to earn the gravitas to be considered a historian or philosopher. 192.135.227.226 15:38, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This claim was addressed and refuted above.  Therefore, I am going to undo your deletion of these links.  Thank you for understanding. Al 15:40, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Al, I didn't see sufficient proof that Richard Carrier has the gravitas to be considered a philosopher or historian. Certainly no reference works list him as a historian or philosopher and I believe that is due to his lack of a doctorate and lack of notable works in these areas. 192.135.227.226 15:46, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Read the above links carefully - the wikipedia categories are not a brand of authority but a tool to help people find articles. He is described in the popular press as a historian and philosopher so people may look for him there. I'm also removing the NPOV tag as that is for content dispute - not filing disagreements.  Sophia 16:41, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: SOPHIA, I don't think any major newspapers or magazines describe Richard Carrier as a historian or philosopher. 199.29.6.2 18:58, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not that it matters--again, mention in a "major" newspaper is not a requirement to be called a historian or a philosopher--but the Los Angeles Times describes me as "Historian Richard Carrier, the atheist author" on p. B2, Saturday, August 20, 2005, written by journalist Patricia Ward Biederman, in the full-page article "Documentary Questions the Existence of Jesus." I haven't had occasion yet to be mentioned in "major" newspapers for my work in philosophy, but people who Google my name will find me frequently mentioned as a philosopher or author of a work of philosophy, and I am often described as such in atheist newsletters around the country, thus as Sophia says, many people will be looking for me as a philosopher. Finally, the editors of the Center for Naturalism website acknowledge me as a philosopher. So with these facts and all the others I list above, I believe "Richard Carrier...is a historian and a philosopher" is sufficiently verifiable, even independently of my own approved bios in IMDb and AmazonConnect. But as before I leave this issue entirely up to objective and fair editors to decide since I did not write this Wiki bio for myself nor am I its editor now. RichardCarrier 19:51, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: (edit clash- with the subject of the article - how wierd!) Here are some links where readers may come across him. As I said the categories are not there are confirmation of academic qualifications - they are filing tags . This is a random selection of ones I came across. He has published books and papers in peer reviewed journals as his cv above shows. I somehow don't think there is anything I can write that will convince you of the validity if the tags as looking at your other contributions there is a very firm agenda. However I would ask that you stop reverting - read the policies above and leave the tags alone. We can disuss how to represent him in the article but the tags are just for ease of access for readers.  Sophia 20:03, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Do any reference works list Richard Carrier as a philosopher or historian? 

message: We've had this discussion Kdbuffalo. Carrier easily falls within his cats on account of his output. Ditto Doherty. Your continued knawing at this issue is both tiresome and ungracious. Please drop it, you were easily outnumbered last time. Laurence Boyce 11:06, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Credentials 

message: Here is the link. Resurrection Dodgeball: A Critical Review of the Habermas-Licona-Carrier Exchange 136.183.154.45 15:47, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Collection of links too biased towards Richard Carrier, why was my critical link removed? 

message: We've lost the photo even though I thought I had tagged it as with the permission of the person. I have e-mailed Richard to ask if he can upload one and grant free licence as the creator of the work but in the meantime if anyone knows of one already in public domain we can use that would be good. The last one came from the imdb database but it's also used on his amazon list page.  Sophia 23:08, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sophia, apparently "permission to use on Wikipedia" is not enough for use here anymore. See Wikipedia:Example requests for permission#What not to ask permission for — coelacan talk — 23:57, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've temporarily added a pic from TGWWT but I think the other one was better. Laurence Boyce 14:34, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added the old photo as Richard Carrier has uploaded it himself and made it public domain as the creator of the work. The other one was a bit grim!  Sophia 22:19, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Cool. Thanks for pursuing that, Sophia. — coelacan talk — 22:33, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Photo