[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: orion-list Kuhn and Popper
> Brief responses. Please read the latest JBL, where Golb's assertion (and
> yours) of Qumran "consensus" and Kuhnian paradigm change is clearly and
> plainly refuted.
In none of my postings did I use the word "consensus". There is a
difference between consensus and paradigm. Nor did I define the expression
"reigning paradigm" as your post suggests. A field in which there exists a
reigning paradigm is not necessarily one in which that paradigm is not
criticized and debated. For instance, the Essene Hypothesis is one element
of the current dominant paradigm, but a number of scholars have put forward
various criticisms and alternate theories. Have any one of these theories
garnered support comparable to the Essene Hypothesis? No. The expression
reigning paradigm is approximately equivalent to your expression "relative
consensus". Both allow for the existence of debate and dissenting views.
> You suggest Vermes, Puech, Stegemann, Murphy-O'Connor et al. have quiety
> conceded defeat of Jonathan as wicked priest. Are we talking about the same
> people? :-)
I made no such suggestion. But my subjective impression is that their
views no longer have the support they once did. Their ideas are seldom
appealed to in current articles. (J. VanderKam is one of the few figures
today actively arguing Jonathan as wicked priest.) I think the idea of
Qumran as founded c. 140 BCE is pretty much dead.
> You recommended we read G. Doudna's book on pNah as linked with events in
> 63 BCE, yet you announce that pNah actually refers to events exactly one
> century earlier. Do I have that straight?
Greg Doudna's "4Q Pesher Nahum: A Critical Edition", scheduled to be
printed out of Sheffield in 2001, is a very important book, both in its
improved reading of the physical text and in its analysis of basic content.
I am basically postponing the publication of my own analysis of pNah so that
I can take advantage of his many important contributions on this key text.
Our points of agreement and difference should be apparent after we're both in
For private reply, e-mail to RGmyrken@aol.com
To unsubscribe from Orion, e-mail to email@example.com with
the message: "unsubscribe Orion." For more information on the Orion Center
or for Orion archives, visit our web site http://orion.mscc.huji.ac.il.