Talk:Criticism of Ellen G. White

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Talk:Criticism of Ellen White)
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Christianity / Adventist (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Seventh-day Adventist Church (marked as High-importance).
 

Move suggestion[edit]

I suggest this article be renamed "Teachings of Ellen White" (currently a redirect), as I mentioned elsewhere. This will avoid duplicating information. We have Inspiration of Ellen White which describes the debate over her inspiration. It includes some critical views already, but noone else has honoured my expansion request placed over a year ago. This present article would give an overview of what she actually taught (based primarily on reliable secondary sources, not her writings themselves which are a primary source in this instance). One POV would be criticisms of those teachings. The base "Ellen G. White" already has the criticism POV overrepresented already. A separate criticism article would be redundant due to duplication. Colin MacLaurin (talk) 03:43, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

NPOV Requirements[edit]

As it stands, this page seems more like an evangelical tract intended to refute any criticism. There needs to be some serious reformatting and editing to bring it into line with Wikipedia's NPOV policies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.201.136.2 (talk) 18:36, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Much has changed in the article since you wrote this, indeed for the better. But, I still have put a NPOV comment to some propaganda which claims that such criticism is without any ground, offering a link to an apologetic site. Tgeorgescu (talk) 23:13, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Plus the quoting of Vincent L. Ramik as a reliable source for refuting criticism is ridiculous, since it is easily verifiable that he worked for the White Estate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.161.223.53 (talk) 15:31, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, Ramik was employed by the SDA officials. He only analyzed this problem as a lawyer, i.e. juridically, and found that according to the laws of that time, White's works were not illegal. That's all he means by "not plagiaristic": the works did not violate the existing laws of that time. He passed no judgment about plagiarism in an academic (i.e. intellectual) meaning. Tgeorgescu (talk) 12:02, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
So, it is disingenuous to claim that Ramik cleared White of copy/pasting. He only passed judgment on illegal copy/pasting, according to the laws of her time. Tgeorgescu (talk) 12:25, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
White has copy/pasted huge chunks of text. This is an objective fact, and Ramik did not deny it. Tgeorgescu (talk) 12:40, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
So, the idea that Ramik cleared her of any plagiarism followed by a quote from her work wherein she admits that she used the works of others without giving them due credit is something worthy of the theater of the absurd, not of an encyclopedic article. It's like Mr. Smith, being sued for the murder of Mr. Doe, receives a not guilty verdict and argues with the judge, "But, your honor, I did kill Mr. Doe!" So, first came the quote from Ramik saying that White committed no plagiarism and then comes the quote from White wherein she stated that she had very good reasons for engaging in plagiarism. We do not have to be tarting the reason of our readers. The apparent contradiction is solved when we realize that Ramik only discussed unlawful plagiarism and he did not discuss academic plagiarism. Tgeorgescu (talk) 14:08, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
The quotes were WP:PAG-compliant, but the overall quality of the argument was worthy of Uncyclopedia. When there is a plagiarism scandal involving a professor, nobody cares if the Police presses charges or if damages get paid for copyright violation. All what matters is copying the work of others without using quotation marks and without giving due credit. That's what plagiarism is for academics, it does not have to be a crime or civil law violation in order to have serious consequences for one's academic career. Tgeorgescu (talk) 16:04, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

About the scientific consensus upon masturbation[edit]

Why is it the scientific consensus? See the article masturbation with all its footnotes. Wikipedia editors have agreed discussing masturbation that it is indeed the scientific consensus that masturbation is healthy (from a medical science viewpoint). Therefore I will consider vandalism the removal of my comment. Tgeorgescu (talk) 10:37, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

See also here and here. We could add the reliable sources quoted therein to the article. Tgeorgescu (talk) 20:34, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Reverting article to a previous version[edit]

Not only it was a POV and blatant apology, but it also constituted original research. This is why I have reverted the article to a previous version. Tgeorgescu (talk) 20:17, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Material needs citations and relation to White[edit]

The majority (all?) of the material in the "Writings on masturbation" section doesnt' seem to be about EG White. The sources, as far as I can tell, discuss masturbation in general .. and dont tie it to White in any way (let alone specifically criticizing White). There may be sources out there that criticize White in this regard: can anyone supply quotes from critics on this topic? The material currently in that section needs to be removed, unless quotes from sources show they are specifically discussing White. The topmost quote from White herself can stay, but should probably be moved down to the lower part of the article that has the "Writings" sections. --Noleander (talk) 15:07, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

There are criticisms of White and masturbation, e.g. [1], [2], [3], [4]. On masturbation and religion, see [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15].
[16] states:

Physicians have completely reversed their beliefs about masturbation over the past few centuries. Masturbation, In the 18th and 19th century, was incorrectly linked to "general debility, consumption, deterioration of eyesight, disturbance of the nervous system, and so on...Polluting and debilitating for the individual, it had a destabilizing effect on society, as it prevented healthy sexual desire from fulfilling socially desirable ends--marriage and procreation, which was the foundation of the social order." (Ornella Moscuci, "Male masturbation and the offending prepuce," at: http://www.cirp.org/library/history/moscucci/ It is an excerpt from "Sexualities in Victorian Britain.")

Alex McKay, research coordinator for the Sex Information and Education Council of Canada commented that many people currently feel guilty about masturbation: "The reason is that sex is supposed to be geared towards reproduction, and masturbation is about as far away from that as you can get...There is now a wide-ranging consensus among health professionals from all disciplines that masturbation is psychologically healthy and something most people do." Sex therapists Bill and Carolyn Chernenkoff from Saskatoon, SK, promote both mutual and private "self-stimulation." They say there's nothing more healthy for hormone-crazed teenagers than masturbation. If the kids are engaging in masturbation, then they won't be practicing sexual intercourse to the same degree, and risk catching STDs or becoming pregnant. (Jack Boulware, "Sex educator says most people masturbate," Salon.com at: http://www.salon.com/health/sex/)

Therefore, we have a reliable source which tells us that the scientific consensus is that masturbation is healthy and beneficial, confirming Szasz' quote (he could be a maverick of psychiatry, but he is not dumb; he can be trusted to render the shift in scientific consensus, otherwise he wouldn't be teaching at the university).
More interesting, here is the official SDA answer to such criticism: [17], they do recognize that her allegations are problematic, and even try to pamper them with an alleged loss of zinc through masturbation (critics have answered that it is rather impossible to masturbate that much, so as to deplete one's zinc reserves). So, if the critique is not academic, at least the answer of the SDA makes matters worse, by trying to refute such criticism. This is an oblique way of recognizing that the criticism is significant enough, as to warrant an official refutation.
Compromise solution: I will keep the references from the text I have added to the article and state that according to many scientists, masturbation is healthy and beneficial. White was clearly fooled by the medical theories of the 19th century and she told lies in the name of God. That is the point of the critique and the SDA did try to answer the objections. Tgeorgescu (talk) 17:02, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
Read the article David Horrobin for evaluating the reliability of the researcher quoted by the Ellen White Estate in defense of Mrs. White's claims. Quotes: "may prove to be the greatest snake oil salesman of his age" (BMJ obituary), "Dr Horrobin was 'in some ways a charlatan'" (BMJ obituary) and "Would someone that contemptuous of the law have any qualms about faking data?" Stephen Barrett, Quackwatch. Tgeorgescu (talk) 18:33, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
Source of the critique, linking Mrs. White to false statements about masturbation: Ronald L. Numbers Prophetess of Health: Ellen G. White and the Origins of Seventh-Day Adventist Health Reform. Acknowledged as relevant by the Ellen White Estate at [18] p. 72. Tgeorgescu (talk) 21:18, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Removed rubbish[edit]

Somebody claimed that the book upon masturbation was not written by Ellen White, but by James White. James White could not have been a mother (read the intro of the book), Ellen White is credited as the author of the book at [19] and Ronald Numbers is a reputable scholar, so his book is a reliable source. So, for James White being the author of the book there is no reliable source, for Ellen White being the author of the book there is a reliable source and the Google Books title page says it is her book, not his. Tgeorgescu (talk) 21:46, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Need Proper Referencing for this claim[edit]

"Many times Ellen White had visions in the company of large groups of people. They claim that these visions were sometimes accompanied by unusual physical phenomena that all were able to witness. One such story relates how on several occasions witnesses recorded her holding a large family Bible for extended periods of time (in one case 20–25 minutes) at arms length just above her head while quoting Scriptural passages out loud; she would trace the verses in the Bible with her free hand as she spoke the words, and was apparently unaware of other people in the room. During such incidents, Adventists claim, several skeptics attempted to pull her arm down, as well as double-check the verses she was speaking aloud against the verses she traced with her finger. The story concludes that these unbelievers could not pull her arm down, and the verses were verbatim quotations from the Bible."

I will follow up on this, but there is no source of this claim and it appears to possibly be fabricated, any claims against the Criticism should have some founding that especially if this is being used as evidence to reject the symptomology of Temporal Lobe epilepsy, which is being forwarded as the mental illness criticism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.234.251.230 (talk) 00:53, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Even if it is made up, Adventists may sincerely believe it is true and use it in order to refute criticism. Anyway, I marked it with {{fact}}. Tgeorgescu (talk) 20:48, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Criticism of Ellen G. White. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

YesY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:48, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Criticism of Ellen G. White. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

YesY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:47, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Criticism of Ellen G. White. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:45, 14 August 2017 (UTC)