Fri Jan 24 09:21:15 1997

From owner-tc-list  Fri Jan 24 09:21:15 1997
Return-Path: 
Received: by scholar.cc.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id JAA18325; Fri, 24 Jan 1997 09:20:06 -0500
X-Sender: waltzmn@popmail.skypoint.com
Message-Id: 
In-Reply-To: <2712086547779575@maties.sun.ac.za>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 08:10:56 -0700
To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
From: "Robert B. Waltz" 
Subject: Art/Science (Was: Re: The function of TC)
Sender: owner-tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
content-length: 1353

Someone (whose name defeated my e-mail program's attempts to find it) wrote: 

>> The purpose of TC is the same as (interestingly) following a great
>> basketball team like Duke or listening to the wondrous music of little
>> Wolfgang.  One does such things for the pure pleasure of discovery and the
>> enjoyment of the very important work of others.  TC is, when done right, as
>> exciting as a double overtime or a Mozart overture.
>> 
>> 
>> >-- Bart Ehrman, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
>> >
>> 
>> Jim
>> 
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 
>> Jim West
>> 
>> jwest@sunbelt.net
>
>I am in total agreement!! TC is after all PARTLY an art!!

Yes, but what makes TC fun is the fact that it's also part science.
It's the science that's fun and easy -- art just makes things harder.

In my humble opinion, of course. :-)

It can hardly be argued, however, that the fact that TC is partly
art that causes us to argue so much. If it were purely science,
we wouldn't have these problems. :-)

-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-

                            Robert B. Waltz
                         waltzmn@skypoint.com

Want more loudmouthed opinions about textual criticism?
Try my web page: http://www.skypoint.com/~waltzmn
(A very rough draft of part of the Encyclopedia of NT Textual Criticism)

Back