Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Peppermint Patty

Professor John Gee Leaves the Maxwell Institute?

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

I asked whether the person getting the quote from Dan's blog knew if the poster was credible or not.  I'm not just buying some random post hook, line, and sinker.  I also asked if someone knew whether we could verify Gee's status with BYU.  Even though you quoted my comments, its almost like you missed the parts of my comments that show that I'm asking questions and being skeptical about what was said.  ...........................

So your default position is "guilty till proven innocent."

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

And this relates to this thread topic how, exactly? 

Scott, you're smarter than to ask this question, but since you asked...

Sometimes there's more to the story than the official communication from the powers that be.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Thinking said:

.............................

Sometimes there's more to the story than the official communication from the powers that be.

Yes, and sometimes there isn't.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 5/24/2019 at 8:13 PM, Robert F. Smith said:

So your default position is "guilty till proven innocent."

You’re projecting.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
42 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

You’re projecting.  

So I'm guilty till proven innocent.  At least you're consistent.  8)

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
On 5/24/2019 at 10:24 PM, Thinking said:

Scott, you're smarter than to ask this question, but since you asked...

Sometimes there's more to the story than the official communication from the powers that be.

So I take it, then, that this relates to the thread topic in the way that any conspiracy theory, however outlandish, might theoretically relate to a thread topic. 

Those who wonder, as I have done, about the genesis of this notion that Gee was “dismissed” from the Maxwell Institute might take a gander at the Mormon Discussions board.  I’ve noticed that a lot of the silly back-and-forth over there bleeds over onto this board in one form or another. 

Edited by Scott Lloyd
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

So I take it, then, that this relates to the thread topic in the way that any conspiracy theory, however outlandish, might theoretically relate to a thread topic.

No. As I wrote earlier,

Perhaps this paragraph hints at some sort of encouraged exit.

Quote

Many of us have hoped for quite a few years now that Dr. Gee would be able to exit the Maxwell Institute, which has been officially uninterested since the Purge of 2012 in the kinds of work that he was hired to do, and to find a more congenial working environment.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Thinking said:

No. As I wrote earlier,

Perhaps this paragraph hints at some sort of encouraged exit.

 

Being “officially uninterested” is a far cry from terminating employment. It might “hint” that Gee had a motive for seeking somewhere else to land, but this is an awfully tenuous string on which to base a supposition that he was pushed out or, as the thread title screams out, “dismissed.” 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Being “officially uninterested” is a far cry from terminating employment. It might “hint” that Gee had a motive for seeking somewhere else to land,

Terminating employment is a far cry from encouraged exit.

Besides, Dr. Peterson also wrote

Quote

Dr. Gee’s research focus, approach, and agenda were out of sync with the interests of the post-2012 Maxwell Institute and were the cause of some discomfort and tension there.

It's not that far out to wonder if both sides were looking for a way for him to leave.

1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

but this is an awfully tenuous string on which to base a supposition that he was pushed out or, as the thread title screams out, “dismissed.” 

Perhaps you need a reminder that the thread title was a question not a supposition. You may disagree with why the question was asked, but it was a question nonetheless.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Thinking said:

Terminating employment is a far cry from encouraged exit.

Besides, Dr. Peterson also wrote

It's not that far out to wonder if both sides were looking for a way for him to leave.

Perhaps you need a reminder that the thread title was a question not a supposition. You may disagree with why the question was asked, but it was a question nonetheless.

I’d call it a question <born of> a supposition — making for a very misleading thread title. When I clicked on the OP and realized there was nothing there beyond the Peterson blog post I had already read, I felt I had been played. 

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Scott Lloyd said:

I’d call it a question <born of> a supposition — making for a very misleading thread title. When I clicked on the OP and realized there was nothing there beyond the Peterson blog post I had already read, I felt I had been played. 

Given Peppermint's past posts, I see no reason to see it as anything but a question that was a bit short due to it being a title.  

Would you see it as less misleading if she put in a "was" at the beginning?  Because one can edit titles.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
23 hours ago, Calm said:

Given Peppermint's past posts, I see no reason to see it as anything but a question that was a bit short due to it being a title.  

Would you see it as less misleading if she put in a "was" at the beginning?  Because one can edit titles.

It might be a little better, but not much. And there would have to be something more to support it than a mere quotation of Dr. Peterson’s blog, as there is nothing there all by itself to support the conclusion that Professor Gee was dismissed. 

Edited to add: Evidently ksfisher felt confused as well, judging by the second post on the thread, one that you, along with five others of us, including Peppermint Patty herself, gave a rep point to. 

It can impact a person’s reputation to have it said that he was “dismissed” from something. If it is said, even by innuendo, it ought to be supported by something more solid than idle conjecture. 

Edited by Scott Lloyd
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

I think it is clear from Dan's blog post that Professor Gee was asked to step aside.

My sources indicate this has been brewing a long time.  They have been looking for a way to get him out since he embarrassed BYU at a major academic meeting a few years ago and proclaimed that the Exodus was a historic event.

ETA: The exodus happened, of course.  Proving it historicaly is virtually impossible.  Indeed, the evidence works against a large, grand exodus as described in the Bible.

Edited by 6EQUJ5
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
22 minutes ago, 6EQUJ5 said:

My sources

Which are?

Not intending to offend, but you are an anonymous poster whose sources could be the cashiers at your local grocery store for the amount of info you gave us.

I am not remembering anything specific from past conversation that indicates you know insiders and the search function no longer allows one to search by author even if it pretends to.

Edited by Calm
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
19 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Those who wonder, as I have done, about the genesis of this notion that Gee was “dismissed” from the Maxwell Institute might take a gander at the Mormon Discussions board.  I’ve noticed that a lot of the silly back-and-forth over there bleeds over onto this board in one form or another. 

Ok....I went over there (something I really try to avoid) and read that thread.  It gives some interesting perspectives and asks some good questions, IMO.  But of course, there are those who are hateful too and I tend to disregard anything they post.

From what I can tell (and I don't have a dog in the fight here....just interested in knowing what happened), here are some details of interest and questions:

- Some are questioning that an endowed chair can be transferred from one department to another, but wonder if BYU is more lenient regarding that taking place.  I guess there may be legal issues at times where this has been attempted?

- Gee does not have Continuing Faculty Status at BYU  (if I'm understanding what Peterson stated about this?).

- Gee’s profile has been removed from the MI scholars page...on last Friday.  (That seems very normal for me to remove it.)

- Gee is teaching Akkadian this fall in the Department of Asian and Near Eastern Languages. ( search here: http://saasta.byu.edu/noauth/classSchedule/ )

-  He is teaching 100 minutes of class time per week.  (One poster called this "an enviably light teaching load", but I immediately thought that he most likely has many other responsibilities other than teaching).

 

I have to believe that it will be easy to find out if Gee keeps the endowed chair and also the  answers to other possible questions many have.   I just hope it's a good move for all involved. 

 

 

 

Edited by ALarson

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, ALarson said:

He is teaching 100 minutes of class time per week.  (One poster called this "an enviably light teaching load", but I immediately thought that he most likely has many other responsibilities other than teaching).

Dan said Gee is a research professor.  It sounded to me like he was asking for the class on top of his other duties.

Edited by Calm
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

It might be a little better, but not much. And there would have to be something more to support it than a mere quotation of Dr. Peterson’s blog, as there is nothing there all by itself to support the conclusion that Professor Gee was dismissed. 

Edited to add: Evidently kllindley felt confused as well, judging by the second post on the thread, one that you, along with five others of us, including Peppermint Patty herself, gave a rep point to. 

It can impact a person’s reputation to have it said that he was “dismissed” from something. If it is said, even by innuendo, it ought to be supported by something more solid than idle conjecture. 

There is a difference between being confusing ( one doesn't know what to think ) and being misleading (one thinks the wrong thing).  The latter often implies intent.

Peppermint didn't say he was dismissed, she asked if he was.  Nor was she trying to support the idea of dismissal by posting the blog info, but showing what her question was about.  She was asking for further clarification, imo, not pushing an interpretation she didn't have.

Quote

I'm not sure what any of this means or how it will effect Mormon Studies.  Thoughts?

I don't see how you are getting "innuendo" out of that.

"kllindley" 

You mean ksfisher?  The fact Peppermint gave him a rep point shows she was looking for insights for her questions just as she stated in her post and not intending to slyly suggest Gee was dismissed since ksfisher pointed out that had been no info from Dan that he had been dismissed.

Perhaps Peppermint had read critics' claims of dismissal and not wanting to spread unfounded gossip as well as having an ongoing interest in the Institute, looked for more information about what had happened from hopefully better sources.

Edited by Calm

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Calm said:

Which are?

Not intending to offend, but you are an anonymous poster whose sources could be the cashiers at your local grocery store for the amount of info you gave us.

I'm not naming them.

You can believe me or not.  I'm just sharing what I know.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Calm said:

There is a difference between being confusing ( one doesn't know what to think ) and being misleading (one thinks the wrong thing).  The latter often implies intent.

Peppermint didn't say he was dismissed, she asked if he was.  Nor was she trying to support the idea of dismissal by posting the blog info, but showing what her question was about.  She was asking for further clarification, imo, not pushing an interpretation she didn't have.

I don't see how you are getting "innuendo" out of that.

"kllindley" 

You mean ksfisher?  The fact Peppermint gave him a rep point shows she was looking for insights for her questions just as she stated in her post and not intending to slyly suggest Gee was dismissed since ksfisher pointed out that had been no info from Dan that he had been dismissed.

Perhaps Peppermint had read critics' claims of dismissal and not wanting to spread unfounded gossip as well as having an ongoing interest in the Institute, looked for more information about what had happened from hopefully better sources.

Yes, I meant ksfisher. 

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

Altered thread title is much better. Thanks to whomever is responsible. 

Edited by Scott Lloyd

Share this post


Link to post

Unless someone reported it, had to be Peppermint.

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, juliann said:

I've been around scholarship for awhile, the idea that a single statement of a historic Exodus would be that embarrassing is a little laughable. 

Why don't we ask the folks at the SBL session and see what they think of Gee's "statement."

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
36 minutes ago, 6EQUJ5 said:

Why don't we ask the folks at the SBL session and see what they think of Gee's "statement."

Why. You said BYU was embarrassed. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Calm said:

Unless someone reported it, had to be Peppermint.

If so, then my thanks to her. 

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...