On Reading Sympathetically, Again

Hayek has not read my book with the measure of 'good will' which an author is entitled to expect of a reader... Until he can do so, he will not see what I mean or know whether I am right.  He evidently has a passion which leads him to pick on me, but I am left wondering what this passion is."

J. M. Keynes, apud Nicholas Wapshott, Keynes Hayek, p. 97.

On a Sympathetic Reading

From George I. Mavrodes, "The Inspiration of Autographs," The Evangelical Quarterly 41.1 (Jan.-Mar. 1969): 19-29.

"Because the latter sense makes his sentence clear, I suspect that it is the one which we should attribute to [him] here as his understanding of the term..."

Mavrodes is here dissecting a statement by Machen.  He doesn't completely disagree with Machen, but neither does he agree with him.  He's not accepting him at face value, in any case. And yet, when given a point of uncertainty in Machen's writing - when given a part that isn't quite clear - what does Mavrodes do?  Does he seize the opportunity to have a "gotcha" moment?  Does he quickly assume the worst about Machen and box his statement in with all the other disagreeable ideas? Does he twist the line into something that can be mocked or used as ammunition in the debate?  No.  Instead, he bends over backwards to find a clear meaning in the sentence.  He gives Machen every benefit of  the doubt.  He assumes that Machen must have a reasonable idea in there somewhere, and he takes some responsibility as a reader to find it.  In short, he gives him a sympathetic reading.