Posted: May 07, 2012 5:06 pm
IgnorantiaNescia wrote:Cito di Pense wrote:IgnorantiaNescia wrote:You are correct to say that massive scholarly imcompetence or a massive scholarly conspiracy is entirely irrelevant to the historicity of Jesus, but this is about the parsimony of Mythicism. Like other pseudo-academic* theories, it needs to address why the experts are so wrong.
Philology invites questions about the very concept of expertise in philology, doesn't it?
Maybe it does, but taking this conversation a few posts back, I still have some questions that you haven't addressed: Do you think lexicographical research is relevant when suggesting novel readings for words? If so, do you think it is odd that Richard Carrier neglected to do such research?
Philology surely invites questions about the concept of expertise in philology, and you just experienced what you thought was the rug coming out from under what you thought were your feet.
I have asked you to ponder the foundations of lexicographical research, which involves reading other words. You can easily see how circular is the definition of expertise in philology, or you can deny it incuriously. If you wish only to defend tradition in the reading of texts, do so openly.