On Norman Finkelstein

Byrnzie

So on the one had we have:

Raul Hilberg, One of the best-known and most distinguished of Holocaust historians.

Avi Shlaim, Professor of international relations at Oxford University, widely regarded as one of the world’s leading authorities on the Israeli-Arab conflict.

Noam Chomsky, Institute Professor and professor emeritus of linguistics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and widely regarded as the most important intellectual alive.

And on the other hand, we have:

an unnamed source

A blogger called Andrew Sullivan.

Alan Dershowitz, Harvard Professor who has been exposed as a liar and a fraud.

And Yosi.


So, whose your money on?

yosi

I did read it. I found it unconvincing. Point me to Finkelstein's bibliography of peer-reviewed publications and perhaps I'll change my mind. If you can't than admit that you have no case. As a general rule in academia, you simply do not get tenure if you haven't published. Forget Dershowitz. If Finkelstein hasn't published he has no business being on a the faculty of even a third-rate university.

Byrnzie

yosi wrote:

I did read it. I found it unconvincing. Point me to Finkelstein's bibliography of peer-reviewed publications and perhaps I'll change my mind. If you can't than admit that you have no case. As a general rule in academia, you simply do not get tenure if you haven't published. Forget Dershowitz. If Finkelstein hasn't published he has no business being on a the faculty of even a third-rate university.

Except that isn't the reason he was denied tenure, as well you know.


http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/the-ch ... le-source/
'...The final decision rested with the university’s president, the Rev. Dennis H. Holtschneider, who said in a three-page letter sent to Mr. Finkelstein on Friday that he had found “no compelling reasons to overturn” the tenure board’s recommendation.

An electronic copy of the letter has now been posted on Mr. Finkelstein’s Web site.

In the letter, Father Holtschneider quotes extensively from the report of the university’s tenure-and-promotion board, which describes Mr. Finkelstein as “a nationally known scholar and public intellectual, considered provocative, challenging, and intellectually interesting,” and then comments that Mr. Finkelstein’s dossier “reveals some division of opinion as to the soundness of some of his scholarship.”

Father Holtschneider’s letter dwells on allegations that Mr. Finkelstein engaged in “ad hominem attacks” on scholars with opposing views. “In the opinion of those opposing tenure,” the university president writes, “your unprofessional personal attacks divert the conversation away from consideration of ideas, and polarize and simplify conversations that deserve layered and subtle consideration.”

The president goes on to invoke the American Association of University Professors and its standards of scholarly conduct, as well as standards articulated in the DePaul Faculty Handbook.

“On the record before me, I cannot in good faith conclude that you honor” those collegial obligations, Father Holtschneider told Mr. Finkelstein in the letter. “Nor can I conclude that your scholarship honors our university’s commitment to creating an environment in which all persons engaged in research and learning exercise academic freedom and respect it in others.”

In an interview over the weekend with The Chronicle, Mr. Finkelstein took strong exception to the letter’s verdict on his character as a scholar and to what he called “this vicious, sordid campaign to dirty my name so that there’s a pretext for getting rid of me.” He said that the university tenure-and-promotion board had relied on the so-called minority report — a document put together by the three members of the departmental committee who opposed giving Mr. Finkelstein tenure — rather than the “majority report” compiled by the nine committee members who supported him.

“I met the requirements of tenure. I met them, and then some,” Mr. Finkelstein said. “But meeting those requirements, and playing by the rules, was not sufficient to overcome the outside pressures that were exerted on DePaul.”

The case has excited widespread interest, in part because of Mr. Dershowitz’s open involvement. The Harvard professor threatened to sue the University of California Press if Mr. Finkelstein’s 2005 book Beyond Chutzpah: On the Misuse of Anti-Semitism and the Abuse of History went to press containing allegations that Mr. Dershowitz plagiarized portions of his book The Case for Israel. And in recent months he has written about Mr. Finkelstein in op-ed commentaries in prominent venues such as The Wall Street Journal and The New Republic. He also comments on the dispute on his Web site...

Mr. Finkelstein said he was convinced that in his case “the university succumbed to outside pressure, and the criticism should be directed fundamentally at those who exerted such pressure that the university finally had to cave in.”

“That to me is the essential element,” he continued. “It’s not Norman Finkelstein versus DePaul University. That is not correct, because I have not the slightest doubt whatsoever that had there not been external pressure exerted on this university, I would have gotten tenure. I don’t want to lose sight of that.”

Other members of the DePaul faculty have apparently had their doubts as well. The Liberal Arts and Sciences’ Faculty Governance Council voted unanimously last November to send a letter to administrators at both DePaul and Harvard to “express the council’s dismay at Professor Dershowitz’s interference in Finkelstein’s tenure and promotion case.”

yosi

No in fact that isn't what I know. And do you really think quoting Norman Finkelstein on Norman Finkelstein's being denied tenure makes for a convincing argument?! He isn't exactly an unbiased source.

yosi

Again, show me what he's published? If he's the academic you think he is it should be an easy thing to do. Please don't offer a reply unless it includes a list of Fink's publications, cause I'll just keep asking you for it.

Byrnzie

yosi wrote:

No in fact that isn't what I know. And do you really think quoting Norman Finkelstein on Norman Finkelstein's being denied tenure makes for a convincing argument?! He isn't exactly an unbiased source.

Actually, the article was written by someone called Jennifer Howard.

Byrnzie

yosi wrote:

Again, show me what he's published? If he's the academic you think he is it should be an easy thing to do. Please don't offer a reply unless it includes a list of Fink's publications, cause I'll just keep asking you for it.

What he hasn't done is publish a book which has been exposed as a fraud, full of plagiarisms. In fact, all of his books so far have been widely praised by serious scholars.
Though I realize this isn't the answer you're looking for, but I don't care. Your latest persistent attempts to deflect attention from the real issues re: the IP issue simply reflect the fact that you have lost all credibility.

yosi

Publications please. Peer-reviewed journals. This is the most basic criteria for tenure. Either point me towards the publications or just admit that Fink's never published a serious academic article in his whole life.

yosi

Here, I'll start you off. The only peer-reviewed journal that I could find where Fink seems to be published regularly is in the "Journal of Palestine Studies," although judging by the fact that the entire editorial board of the journal seems to be Palestinian one has to wonder whether politics played more of a role in his inclusion than academic merit.

Pepe Silvia

yosi wrote:

Pepe Silvia wrote:

yosi wrote:

And his "outing" of Dershowitz is garbage. He accussed Dershowitz of plagiarizing quotations because he cited the primary source rather than the secondary source. Dershowitz was in fact following normal academic procedure, as any half-brained college student could tell you, and was cleared of all such ridiculous charges by a Harvard investigation that Dershowitz himself requested, just to prove the point.

dershowitz got him fired from dupaul

secondly it wasn't just an accusation of plagiarism but in dershowitz's book he cites benny morris and says 2,000-3,000 Palestinians were displaced when the book by morris he cites actually said 200,000-300,000....pretty big error/typo for a harvard professor, i'd say. much less, previously dershowitz said he'd pay $10,000 to anyone who could find an error or falsehood in his book. finkelstein did just that and told him to make the check payable to a fund for jenin victims and dershowitz weaseled out of it saying that was just a typo so it didn't count when here i thought a typo was an error?

Please, Dershewitz didn't get him fired from DuPaul. He was denied tenure because his candidacy had no merit. My father is a university professor. I've lived with university professors all my life. The rule is publish or perish. If you haven't published widely in serious peer-reviewed journals in your field you have no shot at tenure. That's how the tenure system works. Finkelstein didn't get tenure because he didn't deserve it because HE HAS NEVER PUBLISHED ANYTHING IN A PEER-REVIEWED JOURNAL, which is the single greatest criterea for tenure. The real question is how did someone so unqualified for tenure even get so far along in the process before being turned away?

so, you don't have anything to say about the faulty numbers in dershowitz's book or how he weaseled out of his pledge that if anyone could find an error or falsehood in the book he'd pay them $10,000?

and you're right, i'm sure dershowitz's vigorous campaign to get finkelstein fired had nothing to with him getting fired :roll:

yosi

I have nothing invested in Dershowitz. I don't really care if there was a typo in his book, or whether he broke a promise (which I'm pretty sure everybody does all the time, though perhaps less publicly). I've met the guy once, and I'll grant you that he seemed like a pretty abrasive personality. I do know that he's a highly respected and widely published scholar in his field, which cannot be said of Fink, who has barely published and has been denied tenure three times.

Leaving Dupaul aside for the moment, Fink was denied tenure twice before, and Dershowitz had nothing at all to do with that. In the case of Dupaul, as I've already said, the fact that Fink hasn't published is all the reason necessary not to give him tenure. Dershowitz's sole contribution seems to have been that he offered his opinion of Fink's scholarship or lack thereof, ONLY AFTER HIS INPUT WAS REQUESTED BY INVOLVED PARTIES AT DUPAUL. It is so much easier for you and those like you who cling to Fink as one of the few "scholarly" sources you have who support your view on Israel, to believe that his denial of tenure was the result of some sort of nefarious plot by Dershowitz, when the truth is that Fink is a failure as a scholar and didn't get tenure because he didn't deserve to.

Pepe Silvia

yosi wrote:

I have nothing invested in Dershowitz. I don't really care if there was a typo in his book, or whether he broke a promise (which I'm pretty sure everybody does all the time, though perhaps less publicly). I've met the guy once, and I'll grant you that he seemed like a pretty abrasive personality. I do know that he's a highly respected and widely published scholar in his field, which cannot be said of Fink, who has barely published and has been denied tenure three times.

Leaving Dupaul aside for the moment, Fink was denied tenure twice before, and Dershowitz had nothing at all to do with that. In the case of Dupaul, as I've already said, the fact that Fink hasn't published is all the reason necessary not to give him tenure. Dershowitz's sole contribution seems to have been that he offered his opinion of Fink's scholarship or lack thereof, ONLY AFTER HIS INPUT WAS REQUESTED BY INVOLVED PARTIES AT DUPAUL. It is so much easier for you and those like you who cling to Fink as one of the few "scholarly" sources you have who support your view on Israel, to believe that his denial of tenure was the result of some sort of nefarious plot by Dershowitz, when the truth is that Fink is a failure as a scholar and didn't get tenure because he didn't deserve to.

did you read what byrnie previously posted?

Tenure denial and resignation
In early 2007 the DePaul University Political Science department voted nine to three, and the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences Personnel Committee five to zero, in favor of giving Finkelstein tenure. The three opposing faculty members subsequently filed a minority report opposing tenure, supported by the Dean of the College, Chuck Suchar. Suchar stated he opposed tenure because Finkelstein's "personal and reputation demeaning attacks on Alan Dershowitz, Benny Morris, and the holocaust authors Elie Wiesel and Jerzy Kosinski" were inconsistent with DePaul's "Vincentian" values.[44] In June 2007, a 4-3 vote by DePaul University's Board on Promotion and Tenure (a faculty board), affirmed by the university's president, the Rev. Dennis Holtschneider, denied Finkelstein tenure.[45][46]
The university denied that Alan Dershowitz, who had been criticized for actively campaigning against Finkelstein's tenure, played any part in this decision.[46] At the same time, the university denied tenure to international studies lecturer Mehrene Larudee, a strong supporter of Finkelstein, despite unanimous support from her department, the Personnel Committee and the Dean.[47][48] Finkelstein stated that he would engage in civil disobedience if attempts were made to bar him from teaching his students.[49][50]
The Faculty Council later affirmed the right of Professors Finkelstein and Larudee to appeal, which a university lawyer said was not possible. Council President Anne Bartlett said she was "'terribly concerned' correct procedure was not followed".[51] DePaul's faculty association considered taking no confidence votes in administrators, including the president, because of the tenure denials.[52] In a statement issued upon Finkelstein's resignation, DePaul called him "a prolific scholar and an outstanding teacher."[4] Dershowitz expressed outrage at the compromise and this statement in particular, saying that the university had "traded truth for peace."[2][3]
In June 2007, after two weeks of protests, DePaul students staged a sit-in and hunger strike in support of both professors denied tenure. The American Association of University Professors also sent a letter to the university’s president stating: "It is entirely illegitimate for a university to deny tenure to a professor out of fear that his published research … might hurt a college’s reputation" and that the association has "explicitly rejected collegiality as an appropriate criterion for evaluating faculty members".[53]

it seems like plenty of people respect him but yeah, i'm sure dershowitz's massive push to have him fired had nothing at all to do with it. would you like to purchase some beach front property in antarctica?

really? you have nothing to say about dershowitz publishing a book stating that benny morris claimed only 2,000-3,000 palestinians were displaced when morris actually wrote 200,000-300,000 were??? has he fixed this error or does his book still cite the false information? i wonder what the response would be if someone lied about similar numbers concerning the holocaust? then it would be a problem, but when it's dershowitz in defense of israel it's perfectly ok

and the constant calling of him as 'fink' really shows your maturity level

yosi

I'm sure the new additions have corrected the error, and it seems more like a typo to me than an intentional lie. If you are so sure that Fink deserved tenure, why didn't he get tenure at the first two universities he was associated with? If I was convinced that he was denied tenure that he was deserving of solely based on his political views I'd have a huge problem with that. But there is a pattern here. Fink didn't get tenure at two other universities, he is not widely published, and he is only really known for his controversial political writings and not for his scholarship. He only seems to have gotten in line for tenure at Dupaul because his colleagues on the faculty there share his politics. You keep trying to make this about Dershowitz, but you seem to have no answer to the charge that Fink just isn't a serious scholar.

yosi

Fink is easier to type and faster than Finkelstein...plus I don't respect the guy so why go to the extra trouble of typing his full name. Please feel free to refer to Dershowitz as Dersh, I certainly wouldn't care.

Pepe Silvia

yosi wrote:

I'm sure the new additions have corrected the error, and it seems more like a typo to me than an intentional lie. If you are so sure that Fink deserved tenure, why didn't he get tenure at the first two universities he was associated with? If I was convinced that he was denied tenure that he was deserving of solely based on his political views I'd have a huge problem with that. But there is a pattern here. Fink didn't get tenure at two other universities, he is not widely published, and he is only really known for his controversial political writings and not for his scholarship. He only seems to have gotten in line for tenure at Dupaul because his colleagues on the faculty there share his politics. You keep trying to make this about Dershowitz, but you seem to have no answer to the charge that Fink just isn't a serious scholar.

are there any new editions? when i looked it up i could only find 2, a hardcover and a paperback, both only showing first editions, no second....

yosi

I don't know actually. I don't own the book, and I've never been interested in buying it.

Pepe Silvia

yosi wrote:

I don't know actually. I don't own the book, and I've never been interested in buying it.

but you use him as a source to further your argument.

what would your thoughts me if he didn't change this 'error'?

i found it online on google's book reviews but oddly enough the pages the benny morris quote is on (page 25 according to google) is not included online. next time i'm in a bookstore i will try and see if he corrected it or not

yosi

If a new addition came out and the error was still there I'd be surprised that he hadn't fixed it.

Byrnzie

yosi wrote:

I'm sure the new additions have corrected the error, and it seems more like a typo to me than an intentional lie.

This just proves that you failed to read the article above which analyzes the claims made by Finkelstein and Dershowitz.

http://www.counterpunch.org/menetrez04302007.html

Also, the fact that you think Dershowitz's book contains just one error shows that you know nothing about this controversy. Did you even bother to watch the 'Democracy Now!' debate between Finkelstein and Dershowitz?

yosi

Publications?