Subject: RE: Art/Science (Was: Re: The function of TC)

From: "James R. Adair" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 13:41:13 -0500 (EST)

This is the second of two messages that I am forwarding to the list.

Jimmy Adair, Listowner, TC-List
Manager of Information Technology Services, Scholars Press
    and
Managing Editor of TELA, the Scholars Press World Wide Web Site
---------------> http://scholar.cc.emory.edu <-----------------

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 97 07:58 +0200
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Subject: RE: Art/Science (Was: Re: The function of TC)

> Received: from sunvax.sun.ac.za by maties4.sun.ac.za with smtp; Fri, 24 Jan 
> 97 16:06:10 +0200
> Received: from graf.cc.emory.edu by sunvax.sun.ac.za with SMTP;
>           Fri, 24 Jan 1997 16:22:09 GMT
> Received: from scholar.cc.emory.edu (scholar.cc.emory.edu [170.140.38.9]) by 
> graf.cc.emory.edu (8.7.3/8.6.9-950630.01osg-itd.null) with SMTP id JAA15600; 
> Fri, 24 Jan 1997 09:16:37 -0500 (EST)
> Received: by scholar.cc.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
>         id JAA18325; Fri, 24 Jan 1997 09:20:06 -0500
> X-Sender: [email-masked]
> Message-Id: <v03007801af0e801c5d1d@[199.86.33.36]>
> In-Reply-To: <[email-masked]>
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 08:10:56 -0700
> To: [email-masked]
> From: "Robert B. Waltz" <[email-masked]>
> Subject: Art/Science (Was: Re: The function of TC)
> Sender: [email-masked]
> Precedence: bulk
> Reply-To: [email-masked]
> 
> 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
> >>
> >> [email-masked]
> >
> >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
>                          [email-masked]
> 
> 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)
> 

Argueing that TC is partly an art logically holds in store that there is also
 another part. That part certainly entails rigid scientific methodology!!

Johann Cook
Dept of Ancient Near Eastern STudies
University of Stellenbosch
SOUTH AFRICA