Page 101 - 4187

101

1.3.3 Criticism and objections
•  The product of F's labor invites close critical scrutiny / is still under discussion.
 The study done by F does not allow us to answer the question whether P.
 The solution offered by F has been criticized at length.
 F's hypothesis / investigation / opinion/ viewpoint / distinction / definition /
analysis / approach / position …
… leaves many questions open.
… generated controversy / waged debates / is a hot topic in debates.
… draws sharp criticism / neglects the relationship between P and Q.
… raises many questions / is unfortunate / erroneous / vague.
… is awkward in two ways / rests on two dubious claims.
 F's study / comparison/ formulation/ method fails to …
… verify this mechanism (to find a correlation between P and Q).
… to meet the condition/ is far from a solution.
 F's worries/ proposals/ ideas about P are unfounded/ should be rejected.
 The flaw in F's analysis is that he never specifies the criteria by which he
identifies P.
• – We will not undertake a criticism of all of these points here.
• – F's approach / strategy neglects (ignores) Р
– This requirement ... underestimates/ underscores/ underrates (the power of) Р/ is
redundant.
– This hypothesis ... capitalizes on the idea which is objectionable.
– This scheme ... gives researchers the illusion that P.
– This problem/ question ... keeps cropping up throughout [NN].
• – F's approach / strategy has a number of disadvantages (limitations).
– This model ... has a diminished relevance for understanding P.
• – F's strategy/ point ... is not accurately formulated.
– This characterization ... is speculative/ is a vague documentation of the topic.
– The pattern/ model ... is by no means consistent/ cannot be verified.
– This claim ... is felt to be (somewhat) dubious (archaic/ outdated)/ proved to be
false.
– This statement ... does not appear to be compatible with facts.
– The evidence/ analysis ... in these cases is often conflicting/ contradicts the view
that P.
– The thesis in question ... does not pertain to the perception of P.
– There is (thus) no motivation ... for the representation that F envisages.
– The methodology adopted is prejudiced in favor of the theory of P instead
– of addressing Q.
• – Such an analysis / theory / approach / separation/ connection/ identification ...
… does not much capture P.
… must be rejected in favor of P.
… is artificial / inelegant / arbitrary defective.
• – Such comments / considerations / attempts / conceptions/ definitions ...
… run counter to the principles of P.
… are of a rather doubtful kind.
… are doomed to failure/ must be judged a failure.
– are unable to meet the criteria/ lead to a paradox.