| | Critique of John S. Conway's Review of Walter Sanning's Dissolution of Eastern European Jewry |
 | | After a preamble in which Conway praises Sanning for avoiding sensationalism (i.e., refraining from the assertions that gas chambers never existed or that the Holocaust is mere Zionist propaganda), he launches into a reasonable summary of Sanning's demographic findings. |
 | | Still lacking the demographer's expertise, Conway elaborates his suspicions to include "juggled figures" and "dubious conjectures about demographic trends, fertility patterns, death rates, emigration opportunities, and other equally unverifiable suppositions..." I am afraid that I am in the same predicament regarding Conway as Conway is regarding Sanning. |
 | | I will say only this: to the degree that Conway uses his claim of "dubiousness" as an inference that Sanning's conjectures are false, he is liable to the fallacy of argumentum ad ignorantiam: the proposition that if a thing cannot be proven (i.e., "unverifiable"), it is necessarily disproved. |
| www.ihr.org /jhr/v07/v07p375_Desjardins.html (1304 words) |