> My complaint is when people present themselves as experts when in
> fact they have read only dubious sources (an abridged translation of a myth,
> books by the Matthewses, and the jacket blurb on a book by an author who
> hasn't figured out that Ildanach is a soubriquet for Lugh). Do such people
> really want to learn or are their minds already closed to anything but what
> they "like"?
I think most people would not mind comments from someone else regarding the
veracity of one source or another. These comments need not be personal
attacks. I don't think "such people" have claimed to be experts. Some have
offered what information *they* have found useful. While you may not approve,
other "such people" might find such offerings fruitful. More academic
references might be overwhelming.
I deplore the detritus produced by the Matthewses, but many non-academics, many
young people (without degrees in religious studies for instance) have become
interested in Celtic studies because of their books. It is hoped once the
interest develops, that "such people" would move on to better sources, if they
have not been attacked or discouraged.
I think "such people" would like to learn. I hope they stay on this list and
ask questions and make comments. But it should be noted that derisive and
critical comments like your paragraph above do not encourage learning from
anyone, and they discourage participation from the curious.
This message was sent using SnowCrest WebMail.