This review sets a much clearer picture:

https://www.nytimes.com/books/01/04/29/reviews/010429.29nasart.html

Now why does that remind me of Joe Mizzi?

He did compound it with the choice to distance himself with absolute finality.

Compassion and human dignity not an option, verging on the nihilistic. So pacifism was more important, morally speaking. .

I can understand Russell’s ways to logic, albeit entertainment, but not his private life.

That kind of doubt, destroys one’s life and eats you inside out. Yes, ignorance is bliss.

I want to rub Joseph with unguents.

I actually tried to read that editorial but had to give up.

It is totally incoherent and hard to follow.

That Balzan rambles along when speaking is one thing but writing is a another matter. When someone writes one has all the time to read what was written and rectify the flow where necessary.

It is worrying that Balzan does not bother correct his own writing, it is even more worrying if he doesn’t think it necessary.

If that were so, Russell would have treated his son differently.

He just had to condemn him to insanity.

[Daphne – I don’t get your point. Bertrand Russell’s son, John, wasn’t “condemned to insanity by his father”. He was born with a mental illness that is hereditary and, as bad luck would have it, ran through both parental lines. With these things, it’s pot luck.]

Those who are certain usually do not think much and accept what they are handed down without question.

Probably, they live happier lives and, being usually certain of their religious faith, know that they will be rewarded in the afterlife.

The intelligent question everything and accept nothing without question – they tend to be rather pessimistic, litigious and uncertain about religious faith since questioning necessarily leads to religious skepticism.

Sometimes, rationality leaves little space for emotion and those of a rational bent are sometimes seen as aloof or snobbish and may even be persecuted in extreme cases.

[Daphne – Ah, the pitfalls of idiomatic English. The doubt Russell spoke of there is self-doubt not doubt of others or doubt of issues and situations. In other words, not doubt as in Doubting Thomas but doubt as in ‘maybe my judgement is impaired/maybe I am wrong/maybe I am not doing the right thing’. This is because doubt comes only through self-awareness, and self-awareness is only possible beyond a certain level of intelligence. That is why children are often described and perceived as ‘sensitive’ who are of demonstrably superior intelligence to the norm.]

http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/comment/blogs/49124/hands_off_joseph_this_is_a_peoples_referendum