Freethought & Rationalism Archive

J-D · 04-29-2010, 06:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

What I am saying is that I know that scholars who work on old manuscripts take it for granted that scribes sometimes made errors in copying manuscripts....

Again, You don't know what YOU are talking about.

It is quite illogical to take it for granted that scribes made mistakes but still cannot show that any scribe made a mistake.

I know what I am talking about.

You don't know what I am talking about.

I assume as a working hypothesis that scholarly experts know more about their subject specialties than a random poster on an Internet discussion board.

That's what I am talking about.

aa5874 · 04-29-2010, 06:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Again, You don't know what YOU are talking about.

It is quite illogical to take it for granted that scribes made mistakes but still cannot show that any scribe made a mistake.

I know what I am talking about.

You don't know what I am talking about.

I assume as a working hypothesis that scholarly experts know more about their subject specialties than a random poster on an Internet discussion board.

That's what I am talking about.

Well, I am vindicated.

You have confessed that YOU ASSUME.

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

I assume as a working hypothesis that scholarly experts know more about their subject specialties than a random poster on an Internet discussion board.

Now, please show a "master manuscript" that you KNOW was copied by a scribe.

J-D · 04-29-2010, 09:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

I know what I am talking about.

You don't know what I am talking about.

I assume as a working hypothesis that scholarly experts know more about their subject specialties than a random poster on an Internet discussion board.

That's what I am talking about.

Well, I am vindicated.

You have confessed that YOU ASSUME.

Of course I assume. Everybody assumes. Nobody could get anything done if they didn't assume.

If you have some reason to think that there is something wrong with my assumption, you have the option of telling us about it. If you choose not to, people (including me) may draw conclusions from your omission.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

I assume as a working hypothesis that scholarly experts know more about their subject specialties than a random poster on an Internet discussion board.

Now, please show a "master manuscript" that you KNOW was copied by a scribe.

I don't know what you mean by a 'master manuscript'.

I also don't know why you're asking me this. I don't know what you think it will demonstrate if I do show such a 'master manuscript' and I don't know what you think it will demonstrate if I don't.

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.