Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Synoptic-L] the nature of the data

Expand Messages
  • Emmanuel Fritsch
    ... I see some different biases in an automatic process : - Brian pointed out that a gospel may be selected, and the priority of this gospel (typicallly :
    Message 1 of 27 , Dec 4, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      "Stephen C. Carlson" wrote :
      >
      > Brian E. Wilson wrote:
      > >I would suggest that a computer could be programmed to categorize every
      > >word of the synoptic gospels into 222, 221, 220, and so on, without
      > >assuming the Two Document Hypothesis (as do the editors of the HHB
      > >Concordance), or any other supposed documentary relationship between the
      > >synoptic gospels.
      >
      > If you (or anyone else) could produce such a computer program,
      > I'd be very impressed. However, one cannot even identify a parallel
      > without supposing some documentary relationship between the synoptic
      > gospels. [...] Even
      > in noncontroversial parallels, there is discretion in deciding which
      > of two KAIs in Mark correspond to the one KAI in Matthew. Frankly,
      > I doubt it can be done objectively, because the theories and hypotheses
      > we hold influence our perception of the data. This extends to the
      > programmer of the computer as well.

      I see some different biases in an automatic process :
      - Brian pointed out that a gospel may be selected, and the priority
      of this gospel (typicallly : Mark) is assumed, biasing the result.
      In fact, in the treatment, the input gospels should be processed
      with equity.
      - Even if synoptic gospels are processed in equity, some a priori
      may influence the result. I mean particularly to the pattern
      of redaction process that will be seen as most probable : a
      first small document that is step by step increased, or a large
      first document that as been cut toward our gospel. the balance
      between deletion and completion in synoptic process is a global
      a priori in synoptic study.
      - Then, an automatic process would hardly integrate all the other
      information, particularly the links between Luke and John.


      > >What is really needed is computer-produced data that is not dependent on
      > >any synoptic documentary hypothesis and that applies criteria
      > >consistently.
      >
      > I'm not holding my breath. Perhaps a better approach is to ask
      > the proponents of the various solutions to produce their own
      > "partisan" synopses and concordances that sets forth the data
      > in such a manner that renders their solution in the most favorable
      > light. Then we can compare them to see how well they handle the
      > data. Maybe Dungan was right after all that there is no neutral
      > synopsis.

      Are there any referenced biases in Boismard's Synopse ?
      Do you know about a comparison of different existing synopses ?

      a+
      manu

      Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
      List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
    • David Inglis
      ... Dave, did you actually mean: why does 221 look like both 121 and 211, but 122 look only like 121 and not 112 , or have I actually got the wrong data? In
      Message 2 of 27 , Dec 19, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        Way back on Dec 1 Dave Gentile wrote:

        > But perhaps the real question is, why does
        > 122 look like both 121 and 112, but 221 look only like 121 and not 211?

        Dave, did you actually mean: "why does 221 look like both 121 and 211, but
        122 look only like 121 and not 112", or have I actually got the wrong data?
        In any case, have you decided why?

        Dave Inglis
        david@...
        3538 O'Connor Drive
        Lafayette, CA, USA



        Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
        List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
      • David Gentile
        Hi Dave, The case reversed itself with more data. It was 121 - 122 now its 121 - 221 . These appear to be redactor effects / chance , they vanish in the macro
        Message 3 of 27 , Dec 20, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi Dave,

          The case reversed itself with more data. It was 121 - 122 now its 121 - 221
          . These appear to be redactor effects / chance , they vanish in the macro
          categories.

          Dave Gentile
          Riverside, Illinois
          M.S. Physics
          Ph.D. Management Science candidate

          ----- Original Message -----
          From: "David Inglis" <david@...>
          To: <Synoptic-L@...>
          Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 12:54 AM
          Subject: Re: [Synoptic-L] Some numerical results


          > Way back on Dec 1 Dave Gentile wrote:
          >
          > > But perhaps the real question is, why does
          > > 122 look like both 121 and 112, but 221 look only like 121 and not 211?
          >
          > Dave, did you actually mean: "why does 221 look like both 121 and 211, but
          > 122 look only like 121 and not 112", or have I actually got the wrong
          data?
          > In any case, have you decided why?
          >
          > Dave Inglis



          Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
          List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.