Darlene Sybert (c557506@SHOWME.MISSOURI.EDU)
Tue, 6 Aug 1996 18:39:33 -0500

On Tue, 6 Aug 1996, Steve Krause wrote:
> are) critiqued; religous texts don't because part of the point of a
> religious text is to be beyond criticism-- ie, the TRUTH (in all caps on
> purpose).

I disagree... Even the Bible itself says repeatedly to examine what you
read and hear carefully before you believe--and prove it to yourself.
Ecclesiastes is a secular view of the world... Try's in every
chapter..."consider and be wise.." What it does say that many people
with a political reason to persuade us that everything predicted
there is going to happen...not quite the same thing as asking to be believed
without question. Even Jesus said, "come and let us reason together" That
doesn't sound like he expects unquestioning faith in what he says...
(That last paragraph is an example of using the Bible as a source to
prove a point. Joke)

The question I was addressing in my post was the inapprpriateness of just
telling a student she can't use religious texts as sources--or any
others-- in her paper. Part of the assignment is learning to chose
appropriate "voices" to incorporate into your paper, depending on your
reader, your purpose, etc.
And in a nutshell, I think the important thing is for the students to
learn to write for REAL PEOPLE. To think about who is going to read...
I just think it should be the student who does the choosing of
sources--and the peer group and/or instructor who points out whether or
not it seems an effective choice...

We need to stop doing all the choosing...and make students responsible
for their own voice, papers, sources, etc.

Darlene Sybert
University of Missouri at Columbia (English)
A thing of beauty is a joy for ever:
It's loveliness increases; it will never
Pass into nothingness; but still will keep
A bower quiet for us, and a sleep
Full of sweet dreams, and health, and quiet breathing.
-John Keats "Endymion"