Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] how scholars debate controversial issues

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Peter Kirk <peter AT qaya.org>
  • To: kenneth greifer <greifer AT hotmail.com>
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] how scholars debate controversial issues
  • Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 12:28:18 +0000

On 21/03/2007 04:34, kenneth greifer wrote:
I am not a scholar, and I have not understood anything in the argument about Rolf's dissertation or whatever the discussion has been about. I am just curious about how scholars debate normally. Is the debate that you've been doing on B-Hebrew the normal way that scholars discuss controversial subjects or is this somehow different? Also, when someone has a controversial opinion like Rolf, don't scholars analyze the ideas right away because it sounds like his ideas have been around for a while and no one has analyzed them. Maybe I did not understand the discussion, but it sounds like this to me.

Kenneth, it is not true that "no one has analyzed them". On this list several us including myself have repeatedly analysed and criticised Rolf's views for at least ten years. But he seems to have taken on board very few of these criticisms and continues to act as if no one has ever criticised him before, or as if the people who criticise him are nobodies who can be ignored.

--
Peter Kirk
E-mail: peter AT qaya.org
Blog: http://www.qaya.org/blog/
Website: http://www.qaya.org/





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page