Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Solo · 04-02-2008, 07:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

Hey Ted, I asked about some of those issues before submitting actually. They said that this was a paper for an oral presentation so no citations were needed and that it should be written in a spoken form. They said that the paper should be as close to how the oral presentation will be given as possible. I think it was too long personally, but they, and Jeffrey Gibson, seemed to indicate that between 10 and 20 pages was appropriate.

Since it was for an oral presentation it makes working in supporting documentation more difficult.

Also, I lack the linguistic background to provide any really significant supporting analysis. If someone wants to refute my proposals based on linguistic analysis of best texts then they are free to do that, but I don't think that the assumption up front should be that since I am not using native languages that its all baseless.

Malachi, it's a good effort but I agree with Ted's thoughtful comments. I would add one: when you go against a scholarly consensus you need to know at minimum what the consensus is. One glaring example is your view that Mark's transfig witnesses are the three Pauline "pillars" re-deployed. I happen to think there may be a connection (though I'm not committed to it) but most academics are convinced that James "the pillar" is not a Zebedee but "the brother of the Lord" (or James the Just). The argument can be made that Paul references two Jameses but one needs to tread carefully. In the account of Acts, James the son of Zebedee (James the Greater), and Mark's witness to Jesus' transfig, is executed on orders of Herod (12:2) before Paul travels to Jerusalem. You have no choice but to deal with that.

I wish you the best of luck.

Jiri

DrJim · 04-02-2008, 08:40 AM

Getting a paper into the national SBL--especially for the first time--can be a struggle. Some sessions really are swamped with proposals. The coordinators of each session has a lot on their plates and if they get a number of first time submissions, they have to read full papers. One must make a good impression quickly!

A lot of first time presenters present a chapter from their doctoral dissertations. This was certainly the case for me. The paper I submitted had almost as much text in the footnotes as the body. In fact, I added material to these notes that never showed up in the dissertation, just to be on the safe side. I tried anticipating as many objections as I could and answering them in the notes. I also included far more quotes and references to other work just so I could back my own claims up. It is nice to have them written down, because sometimes it is hard to think on one's feet.

Best of luck next time,
Jim

Jeffrey Gibson · 04-02-2008, 08:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrJim

Getting a paper into the national SBL--especially for the first time--can be a struggle. Some sessions really are swamped with proposals. The coordinators of each session has a lot on their plates and if they get a number of first time submissions, they have to read full papers. One must make a good impression quickly!

A lot of first time presenters present a chapter from their doctoral dissertations. This was certainly the case for me. The paper I submitted had almost as much text in the footnotes as the body. In fact, I added material to these notes that never showed up in the dissertation, just to be on the safe side. I tried anticipating as many objections as I could and answering them in the notes. I also included far more quotes and references to other work just so I could back my own claims up. It is nice to have them written down, because sometimes it is hard to think on one's feet.

But so far as I know, "Malachi" didn't have any footnotes to add since he hasn't done much, if any, of even the basic research that he (or anyone who wished, as he did, to speak authoritatively) should have done on the history of the discussion of , and the scholarly literature on, the topics which are at the center of his claims about Mark, to produce any.

In fact, he seems to be almost totally unaware that there has been scholarly discussion on these matters, let alone where it is to be found.

Jeffrey

Ted Hoffman · 04-03-2008, 03:04 AM

Plus, Malachi, write like you have thought about these matters deeply. Write like you have read several books and learnt how to paint using words. You are not writing to laymen! These SBL guys love the right lingo that makes them feel they are reading something important, deep, insightful and eye-opening. They also like to think it is the product of a well-instructed mind who can spin concepts and expose the readers to fresh and exciting perspectives.
Sample this passage from Dr. Jim's abstract:

Quote:

Moreover, it views the Twelve as a complex symbolic universe in which the historically contingent is revealed as instantiating eternal and paradigmatic truths. This discovery of the timeless within history is what bridges the gap between the eponymous prophet and the scribe, and makes the prophetic text eternally relevant and revelatory for the initiated interpreter.

Can you dig it?

Oh, wait, he (Dr. Jim) concludes:

Quote:

Viewing the Book of the Twelve in this way provides a plausible scenario for explaining the desire to produce a tightly interrelated anthology of prophetic documents. Moreover, it can impact how scholars view ancient Judaism’s return to older mythological themes of cosmology, heavenly rebellion and combat, themes that are expressed in a number of apocalyptic texts of the late second temple period.

Amazing shit, wouldn't you say?

I mean, his abstract alone makes me want to want to read that article because I want to know this interrelated anthology, I want to know what the prophetic and the apocalyptic texts say about the mythology of heavenly rebellion and combat, I immediately want to know how the twelve in the symbolic universe help reveal the historically contingent (yes I want to know this too) as instances of eternal and paradigmatic truths.

And yes, "tightly interrelated" has some sexual tension around it. So you see, packaging is important too. It's what advertises your work.

Ted Hoffman · 04-03-2008, 03:06 AM

I forgot, I also want to know the eponymous prophet!

squiz · 04-03-2008, 08:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ted Hoffman

Plus, Malachi, write like you have thought about these matters deeply. Write like you have read several books and learnt how to paint using words. You are not writing to laymen! These SBL guys love the right lingo that makes them feel they are reading something important, deep, insightful and eye-opening.

Why not just try a postmodernist bullshit generator?
http://www.elsewhere.org/pomo/
(Hit refresh for a new version).

Or maybe you could try adapting the Sokal paper to Biblical Studies:
http://www.physics.nyu.edu/faculty/sokal/
Original Sokal article here:
http://www.physics.nyu.edu/faculty/s...inglefile.html

Ted Hoffman · 04-03-2008, 08:57 AM

Of course, the sokal paper demonstrated how incredibly the postmodernist in us strives to be sublime.

Jeffrey Gibson · 04-03-2008, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ted Hoffman

These SBL guys love the right lingo that makes them feel they are reading something important, deep, insightful and eye-opening.

How do you know this? Have you ever been to an SBL meeting?

Jeffrey

Ted Hoffman · 04-03-2008, 11:02 PM

Quote:

How do you know this? Have you ever been to an SBL meeting?

Those remarks were meant to be amusing Gibson. I am sorry my humour got wasted on you.

Jeffrey Gibson · 04-04-2008, 05:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ted Hoffman

Quote:

How do you know this? Have you ever been to an SBL meeting?

Those remarks were meant to be amusing Gibson. I am sorry my humour got wasted on you.

So .. the answer is no. Thanks for clarifying.

Jeffrey

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

04-02-2008, 08:40 AM	#12
DrJim Regular Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: Lethbridge AB Canada Posts: 445	Getting a paper into the national SBL--especially for the first time--can be a struggle. Some sessions really are swamped with proposals. The coordinators of each session has a lot on their plates and if they get a number of first time submissions, they have to read full papers. One must make a good impression quickly! A lot of first time presenters present a chapter from their doctoral dissertations. This was certainly the case for me. The paper I submitted had almost as much text in the footnotes as the body. In fact, I added material to these notes that never showed up in the dissertation, just to be on the safe side. I tried anticipating as many objections as I could and answering them in the notes. I also included far more quotes and references to other work just so I could back my own claims up. It is nice to have them written down, because sometimes it is hard to think on one's feet. Best of luck next time, Jim

04-03-2008, 03:06 AM	#15
Ted Hoffman Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: "" Posts: 3,863	I forgot, I also want to know the eponymous prophet!

04-03-2008, 08:57 AM	#17
Ted Hoffman Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: "" Posts: 3,863	Of course, the sokal paper demonstrated how incredibly the postmodernist in us strives to be sublime.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.