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: "K Randolph" <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] how scholars debate controversial issues
  • Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2007 14:50:24 -0700

Dear Moderators:

Recently, in response to the request that this forum be made more
scholarly friendly, the proposal was made that:

... to be hospitable as such (to scholars), b-hebrew must become a
moderated list, and its character must also change.

The question comes up, on what basis will the moderation be practiced?
Chabad? Southern Baptist? Missouri Synod Lutheran? Harvard University?
Minimalist? Maximalist? Etc.? All of these groups have serious
scholars within their traditions, not one has a corner on scholarship.

True scholarship can stand on its own. It does not have to agree with
any consensus, as long as the proponent can answer objections. Those
who receive the answers don't have to agree with those answers, and at
times there must just be an agreement to disagree. But a school of
scholarship seems deficient when its members resort to name calling
(e.g. oddball, weird, UFOology), ad hominem attacks through straw man,
red herring and other logical fallacies, calls for censorship and
attempts at proselytism through claims that theirs is the only
legitimate way of studying the data.

I've enjoyed the give and take of dealing with people with whom I
disagree, as long as it is done with respect, and I have learned from
the interchange. That does not mean that we have come to an agreement.
I would hate to see this forum restricted to only one school of
scholarship where its members can preach to the choir, and all others
silenced.

Karl W. Randolph.




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page