Lundahl (2022u) Gives More Illegitimate Excuses for Using Racist Terms. Also, Does Mr. Lundahl Even Own a Copy of Lewis (1960)?
Kevin R. Henke
October 29, 2022
In Henke (2022b), Henke (2022bb) and Henke (2022ec), I pointed out and criticized Mr. Lundahl for his racist comments. In response to Henke (2022bb), Mr. Lundahl in Lundahl (2022u) again attempts to defend his use of racist terms. I’m not interested in Mr. Lundahl’s excuses. There’s also simply no need to translate racist or other vulgar terms into English. Any ethical translator can always note that the original text is vulgar and potentially offensive, and then summarize the meaning of the text into more acceptable terms. There’s no need to spread racist obscenities into another language.
In Henke (2022bb), I also stated:
“I should also point out that Lewis (1960, p. 64) used a racist term for Native Americans.”
In response to my comment, Lundahl (2022u) makes an interesting and relevant statement:
“Oh, dear me ... Indians is "racist"? If that was not the term, what was it?”
No, Mr. Lundahl, that’s not the racist term. The word “Indian” does not appear anywhere on page 64 of Lewis (1960). However, this statement in Lundahl (2022u) raises a far more important issue than any effort by Mr. Lundahl to search for an obscenity in a reference. Mr. Lundahl appears to be guessing at the identity of the racist term in Lewis (1960, p. 64) rather than actually reading the page. Why didn’t or why can’t Mr. Lundahl consult p. 64 of Lewis (1960) to actually see the identity of the term? In Lundahl (2022a), he apparently cited from Lewis (1960, p. 87f). So, why doesn’t or why can’t Mr. Lundahl now consult his copy of Lewis (1960)? Does he have ready access to Lewis (1960)? Does he actually own a copy of the book or did he borrow a copy from a library or another source when he wrote Lundahl (2022a)?
So, why is Mr. Lundahl’s ability to readily access Lewis (1960) important? In my essays in this debate, I frequently quoted and referenced statements from many pages in Lewis (1960). Mr. Lundahl in Lundahl (2022j) even accused me of not reading Lewis (1960). How could he make that accusation without comparing my statements about Lewis (1960) with the contents of his copy of the book? In his more recent essays, how often did Mr. Lundahl actually take the time to check my references from Lewis (1960) to make sure that I’m citing them properly or, just as important, that he is understanding and interpreting Lewis (1960) properly and not misremembering it? Because our memories often fail us (e.g., Neisser and Harsch 1992), it’s absolutely critical that whenever one of us references a source, that both sides check and recheck the reference to make sure that both of us are properly referencing and interpreting it. Checking and rechecking are especially critical with Lewis (1960) because this book is often poorly written and very outdated.
References:
Lewis, C.S. 1960. Miracles, 2nd ed., printed 1974: Harper One: HarperCollinsPublishers, 294pp.
Neisser, U. and N. Harsch. 1992. “Phantom flashbulbs: False Recollections of Hearing the News about Challenger” in E. Winograd and U. Neisser (eds.), Affect and Accuracy in Recall: Studies of "Flashbulb" Memories, Cambridge University Press, pp. 9–31.