Not sure that it was the only interaction- but the Keith Woods' tweet was a link to an article critical of the ADL written by a renowned Jewish scholar, Norman Finkelstein. What is important, who tweets the link, or the link's contents?
Let's just also stipulate that Norman Finkelstein is not a renowned Jewish scholar. He is a profound antisemite whose Jewish ethnicity makes him a favorite prop for neo-nazis to trot out.
Both. While avoidance of ad hominem is a useful rule for sophists using argumentation as an intellectual game or to better their ability to argue in a Greek court of law, in the modern world there is content of the topic but also, very much, the reason a particular channel chose to share it and the reason a particular influential individual chose to reshare it. Even in our modern law courts, it is germane to question not just the testimony of a witness but the character of said witness.
The critique in the article can be considered on its own. The fact that it comes to us via Elon Musk resharing Keith Woods, and not as an original link from Musk, tells us volumes about how Musk is willing to be publicly portrayed and who he appears to be listening to, which are also relevant information for the topic at hand.
Comments
Regardless of what you think about ADL, he is now retweeting white nationalists like Keith Woods.
Not sure that it was the only interaction- but the Keith Woods' tweet was a link to an article critical of the ADL written by a renowned Jewish scholar, Norman Finkelstein. What is important, who tweets the link, or the link's contents?
Let's just also stipulate that Norman Finkelstein is not a renowned Jewish scholar. He is a profound antisemite whose Jewish ethnicity makes him a favorite prop for neo-nazis to trot out.
Both. While avoidance of ad hominem is a useful rule for sophists using argumentation as an intellectual game or to better their ability to argue in a Greek court of law, in the modern world there is content of the topic but also, very much, the reason a particular channel chose to share it and the reason a particular influential individual chose to reshare it. Even in our modern law courts, it is germane to question not just the testimony of a witness but the character of said witness.
The critique in the article can be considered on its own. The fact that it comes to us via Elon Musk resharing Keith Woods, and not as an original link from Musk, tells us volumes about how Musk is willing to be publicly portrayed and who he appears to be listening to, which are also relevant information for the topic at hand.