Let’s not heap too much praise on Stanley Fish: he is one of the pre-eminent post-modernist philosophers who believes that there’s no such thing as absolute, verifiable truth in anything, anywhere.
Do ya think he would verify his philosophy as absolutely true?
Is Stanley Fish a “critical” scholar? They just treat it all as a word game . . . find the premise, demonstrate that the argument does not fully flow from the premise or contradicts it. In this case the premise is that the athiest looks at the evidence and the Christian does not; Fish shows the reverse. It’s just logic and argument, the difference in the crit and the normal is that the crit hangs their hat on no premise they will defend, so thier analytical tool isn’t ever used against them. They attack only and express their preferences only through what they attack.
Guess he's never been in a real honest to goodness fight. When a fist hits your face you discover all sorts of truths and you either get real or get beat.
Is he absolutely sure of that?