Subj : Re: C.P. Addition: Isabel de Gressenhall, wife of William de
To   : All
From : taf
Date : Wed Sep 05 2018 01:06 am

From: taf <taf.medieval@gmail.com>

On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 4:00:34 PM UTC-7, johnschm...@gmail.com wr=
ote:

> You see Richardson's "certification" of his broken Cudworth lineage as
> "humbuggery."

Just for the record, I did not specifically address my comment toward anyon=
e in particular.  Any certification is humbuggery.  'This is correct becaus=
e I say it correct' is not just simple appeal to authority, it is appeal to=
 _my_ authority.  I can just see how this is supposed to play out in the mi=
nds of people who do this: 

Proponent: Here is the evidence and this is my conclusion.

Respondent: I see what you are thinking, but I just don't view the evidence=
 as sufficient to draw your conclusion to the exclusion of possible alterna=
tives.

Proponent: Well then I _certify_ it.

Respondent: Gasp!  That changes everything.  Now that you have certified it=
, the same evidence that was previously insufficient can only be viewed as =
overwhelming.  I bow to your persuasive power. I don't know how I ever coul=
d have let something as insignificant as evidence stand in the way of recog=
nizing your enormous greatness in all things.

Yeah, that isn't the likely outcome.  More like:

Proponent: Well then I _certify_ it.

Respondent: OK, then _I_ certify that the evidence is insufficient to draw =
your conclusion.

Proponent: Then I double certify it.

Respondent: Then double-dog certify its insufficiency.

etc.

Certification adds nothing - indeed, it muddles things: if the same person =
posts something without a certification, does that mean it isn't to be take=
n seriously, or is it so good that the compiler does not feel the need to s=
tick a fancy bow on it to hide an undisclosed flaw?

taf
--- NewsGate v1.0 gamma 2
 * Origin: News Gate @ Net396 -Huntsville, AL - USA (1:396/4)

.