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

[dirk at SMRA.CO.UK]

--- In gothic-l at y..., "Troels Brandt" <trbrandt at p...> wrote:
> --- 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


Hi Troels,

I agree with you, but I think that such a discussion list should also
be open to people like me, who have not the time, knowledge and
resources to conduct thorough research in these matters and who will
necessarily have to rely on the works of others.

cheers,
Dirk





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/