[b-hebrew] Prophetic Perfect? Psalm 107
Lisbeth S. Fried
lizfried at umich.edu
Sun May 23 11:57:22 EDT 2004
The reference to white swans and induction is extremely interesting.
Let us say that you saw 1000 white swans and 2 black ones.
Further let's say that you saw 1000 black crows and (for argument's sake)
two white ones.
Now suppose I told you that there is a white bird out there.
Would you assume it to be a swan or a crow?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: b-hebrew-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org
> [mailto:b-hebrew-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Peter Kirk
> Sent: Saturday, May 22, 2004 2:23 PM
> To: furuli at online.no
> Cc: b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Prophetic Perfect? Psalm 107
> On 20/05/2004 14:01, furuli at online.no wrote:
> > ...
> > To ignore the examples that contradict one's view with the argument
> > that they are errors, does not recommend itself as a good
> > method. Errors will occur, but they must be shown to be
> errors on the
> > basis of a scientific analysis. If you have studied the
> Philosophy of
> > science, you should be familiar with the problem of induction; one
> > million white swans do not prove that all swans are white, but two
> > black swans, who are not dyed or have gone through a fire, will
> > falsify the hypothesis. Thus, the 1.000 non-past WAYYIQTOLs are a
> > stronger basis for saying that WAYYIQTOL is not
> semantically speaking
> > past tense than the 12.000 WAYYIQTOLs occurring in past
> narratives. ...
> Your argument from swans is an interesting one. Suppose we do
> find a million white swans and two black ones. What do we
> conclude? Of course not that all swans are white. But we
> suspect that there is some reason for the exceptions. Maybe
> the black ones are a different species, or mutations. Or
> maybe they have been in some special environment which has
> changed their colour. Good scholars will look for a reason.
> But they will not argue that "not all swans are white,
> therefore the colour of swans is irrelevant". However, that
> seems to be how you argue when you reject the significance of
> the observation that the great majority of WAYYIQTOLs are
> sequential, and most of these are in past context although
> some are future because they follow future verb forms.
> Peter Kirk
> peter at qaya.org (personal)
> peterkirk at qaya.org (work)
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
More information about the b-hebrew