Yesterday I commented on a paper by Matthew R. Hoffman in the Iowa Law Review. My attention had been drawn to the paper by Derek Fincham. I now stand rebuked by Fincham in a further post, "On Polite Discourse".
Fincham accepts that there were problems with the paper:
Hoffman certainly makes some mistakes, and one of the common mistakes legal writers fall into is they can often write elegantly, but fail to conduct enough background research into an area before jumping in.The thing to remember is that the paper was not a piece of assessed course work, but an academic article that appeared in the Iowa Law Review. And Fincham is quick to remind us that the Iowa Law Review is a "well-respected legal journal". (See journal website.) So perhaps Fincham needs to ask how the editors and the anonymous referees failed to spot the "mistakes" (as Fincham puts it) in the paper?
Is it "aggressive criticism" to say "Hoffman's article has failed to engage with the current debate over 'the international movement of antiquities'"?