جيمس إتش هايسلوب

جيمس إتش هايسلوب
معلومات شخصية
	بوابة الأدب
	تعديل مصدري - تعديل

جيمس إتش هايسلوب (بالإنجليزية: James H. Hyslop)‏ هو أستاذ جامعي وعالم نفس وكاتب أمريكي، ولد في 18 أغسطس 1854 في زينيا في الولايات المتحدة، وتوفي في 17 يونيو 1920 في في الولايات المتحدة.^[1]^[2]^[3]

مراجع

^ "Professor Edwin William Friend". The Lusitania Resource. نسخة محفوظة 7 أبريل 2019 على موقع واي باك مشين.
^ Frank Podmore. (1902). Modern Spiritualism: A History and a Criticism. Volume 2. p. 345
^ Arthur Berger. (1988). Lives and Letters in American Parapsychology: A Biographical History, 1850-1987. McFarland. p. 62. (ردمك 0-89950-345-4). The charges made against Hyslop by Pope and Friend when they resigned from the ASPR in 1915 have been reechoed recently by the historian R. Laurence Moore: Hyslop ran the ASPR "like a dictator". It was a one-man rule and Hyslop was no angel. James thought him crude. Funk told Hyslop bluntly: "[Y]ou antagonize." Hyslop's conduct in the Palladino case seems to have been costly to the ASPR. Hyslop's writings were criticized not only for their inadequacies but for his convoluted style. James's letters in 1901 and 1902 are full of complaints about it. To Hodgson he remarked: "I think Hyslop's discussions and methods admirable in all but literary style," and in his correspondence with Flournoy, he said: "[Hyslop's] report is intolerably ill written and I have not been able to read the whole of it. Sir Oliver Lodge deplored the fact that Hyslop did not have "the gift of expressing himself in clear and simple English. Throughout his voluminous writings the sentences are frequently involved, and sometimes so curiously constructed that it is difficult to disentangle their meaning." Sir William Barrett lamented similarly: "Hyslop would have gained a wider and more respectful hearing had he cultivated a better and more restrained style of writing, and been less dogmatic and combative in the expression of his opinions."

وصلات خارجية

مقالات تستعمل روابط فنية بلا صلة مع ويكي بيانات

جيمس إتش هايسلوب في المشاريع الشقيقة:

هذه بذرة مقالة عن كاتب أمريكي بحاجة للتوسيع. فضلًا شارك في تحريرها.

[1] "Professor Edwin William Friend". The Lusitania Resource. نسخة محفوظة 7 أبريل 2019 على موقع واي باك مشين.

[2] Frank Podmore. (1902). Modern Spiritualism: A History and a Criticism. Volume 2. p. 345

[Berger_1988-3] Arthur Berger. (1988). Lives and Letters in American Parapsychology: A Biographical History, 1850-1987. McFarland. p. 62. (ردمك 0-89950-345-4). The charges made against Hyslop by Pope and Friend when they resigned from the ASPR in 1915 have been reechoed recently by the historian R. Laurence Moore: Hyslop ran the ASPR "like a dictator". It was a one-man rule and Hyslop was no angel. James thought him crude. Funk told Hyslop bluntly: "[Y]ou antagonize." Hyslop's conduct in the Palladino case seems to have been costly to the ASPR. Hyslop's writings were criticized not only for their inadequacies but for his convoluted style. James's letters in 1901 and 1902 are full of complaints about it. To Hodgson he remarked: "I think Hyslop's discussions and methods admirable in all but literary style," and in his correspondence with Flournoy, he said: "[Hyslop's] report is intolerably ill written and I have not been able to read the whole of it. Sir Oliver Lodge deplored the fact that Hyslop did not have "the gift of expressing himself in clear and simple English. Throughout his voluminous writings the sentences are frequently involved, and sometimes so curiously constructed that it is difficult to disentangle their meaning." Sir William Barrett lamented similarly: "Hyslop would have gained a wider and more respectful hearing had he cultivated a better and more restrained style of writing, and been less dogmatic and combative in the expression of his opinions."

[1]

[2]

[3]

جيمس إتش هايسلوب

مراجع

وصلات خارجية

قائمة التصفح

بحث