[gothic-l] Re: Dirk's dangerous amateurs

[Troels Brandt]

--- In gothic-l at y..., dirk at s... wrote:

> I think it is fun too and there is nothing 'dangerous' about
reading
> those texts. Putting those text into the right historical context
and
> applying the right philological methods, however, requires
> considerable skill. In the past people tended to read ancient
authors
> as rendering complete and true historical accounts at least where
it
> fitted their pre-concerived theories. Only rigorous analysis,
applying
>  philological methods and a sound understanding of the historical
> setting can reveal the historical truth in those accounts. At least
> that is my opinion.

I can see I misunderstood your answer earlier. I do not think anybody
will protest against your last statement. However in technical
scientifics progress and new inventions had not been the same using
only that methode - and in this area there was no Gothic-list. You
should read both the source and scholarly literature (i.e. some new
dissertations, where the different views normally have to be quoted
before the conclusion)) if you want to use the source. Sometimes it
is even better to make your own opinion and explain it, than just to
conclude "most scholars ..." as often is your alternative if you want
to join a discussion without just asking questions. Statistics are
dangerous too - and it is not a question of democracy among scholars.

Troels



You are a member of the Gothic-L list.  To unsubscribe, send a blank email to <gothic-l-unsubscribe at egroups.com>.

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/