Not sure just where to put this topic so figure this is probably the safest place.
In another thread the poster, from a different site, spoke about how the publishing of books and such has been an innovation. How it has spread, or allowed for the spreading, of esoteric / occult knowledge to people who might otherwise not have been introduced to said material.
While I agree in some aspects it also got me to wondering.
1. Most historical academic material is written under the premise that the reader already has a certain degree of prior knowledge. Knowledge based upon both an understanding of the arguments and academic merit as well as the underlying material. So there is a presumption of prior knowledge and relevance to the subject material being discussed or presented. That and to a certain degree a presumption that the reader is aware of prevailing theories and aligns with at least one of them.
2. While many pagan / occult books are not written by academic level figures they still adhere to the conditions in statement 1 for the most part. I say non academic figures for while the author may have a degree, it seems seldom does the degree actually apply to the area of interest they are writing about. An idea is presented with the presumption that the reader has some level of prior or Prerequisite knowledge of the material being presented.
When such prerequisite knowledge is presumed to be missing then the citations and indexed references become even more critical to evaluating and understanding the argument being presented. Especially in the context that cited passages, words, paragraphs, etc frequently loose their written meaning when taken outside of the totality of the section or entire works.
Consider the line in the movie THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN where one of the key figures is being asked about having enemies. He responds that he has no enemies. After which Yul Brenner then asks him is that "No enemies alive or dead?" Where we find out all his enemies are dead as he has faced them all. So knowing the full context of the statement and placement changes the meaning of the initial line.
Whether it be a 101 book or an advanced level book the presumption is still to be found that the reader has some level of prerequisite knowledge. Along with a presumption that when some condition or ideal is discussed the reader would at least become familiar with the referenced material.
Sadly though I have to conclude that such additional research and reading tends not to happen to often if at all. Far to often I see postings that cold be answered before being asked if such references where researched.
Its an analogy for certain but I am reminded of the many test's I took while in the military to make rank. We got cheat sheets telling us which books to study, which sections to study, etc. Yet far to often people didn't make the connection that if it's in the referenced section then it becomes usable. So the citations, quotes, etc which referenced other works were overlooked though at times questions did come from them. Showing that critical analysis and complete reading was a requirement vice just reading what was written in the book in our hands as it where.
I grant at times such reference items or citations are difficult to obtain. Other times equally problematic in that they can be obtained but are in some other language, even to include old English which you may not be able to read. Thus your restricted to translations or extracts which may or may not be useful. Myself I try to read multiple translations to see how they might differ though admit that can be time consuming. Nor does that rule out the issue of presumption and assumption of word selection and meaning by the author. In that regard I tend to keep a dictionary near by and look up words for meanings, especially when used in a manner I am not familiar with.
But back to the idea which inspired this thread "Do you read the indexed or cited references?" The availability of knowledge has clearly taken great jumps in availability to the general public. Yet is the innovation of printing and publishing actually as much of an innovation as might be though? So much misinformation, misdirection and false conclusions and out and out deception is a by product. Especially in the context that many who read do not read critically nor have the prerequisite background knowledge for the available material they are reading about.
So to bring this long and probably drawn out posting to an end what do you think of both the idea of prerequisite knowledge being implied and the reader actually reading the cited or indexed references?
In another thread the poster, from a different site, spoke about how the publishing of books and such has been an innovation. How it has spread, or allowed for the spreading, of esoteric / occult knowledge to people who might otherwise not have been introduced to said material.
While I agree in some aspects it also got me to wondering.
1. Most historical academic material is written under the premise that the reader already has a certain degree of prior knowledge. Knowledge based upon both an understanding of the arguments and academic merit as well as the underlying material. So there is a presumption of prior knowledge and relevance to the subject material being discussed or presented. That and to a certain degree a presumption that the reader is aware of prevailing theories and aligns with at least one of them.
2. While many pagan / occult books are not written by academic level figures they still adhere to the conditions in statement 1 for the most part. I say non academic figures for while the author may have a degree, it seems seldom does the degree actually apply to the area of interest they are writing about. An idea is presented with the presumption that the reader has some level of prior or Prerequisite knowledge of the material being presented.
When such prerequisite knowledge is presumed to be missing then the citations and indexed references become even more critical to evaluating and understanding the argument being presented. Especially in the context that cited passages, words, paragraphs, etc frequently loose their written meaning when taken outside of the totality of the section or entire works.
Consider the line in the movie THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN where one of the key figures is being asked about having enemies. He responds that he has no enemies. After which Yul Brenner then asks him is that "No enemies alive or dead?" Where we find out all his enemies are dead as he has faced them all. So knowing the full context of the statement and placement changes the meaning of the initial line.
Whether it be a 101 book or an advanced level book the presumption is still to be found that the reader has some level of prerequisite knowledge. Along with a presumption that when some condition or ideal is discussed the reader would at least become familiar with the referenced material.
Sadly though I have to conclude that such additional research and reading tends not to happen to often if at all. Far to often I see postings that cold be answered before being asked if such references where researched.
Its an analogy for certain but I am reminded of the many test's I took while in the military to make rank. We got cheat sheets telling us which books to study, which sections to study, etc. Yet far to often people didn't make the connection that if it's in the referenced section then it becomes usable. So the citations, quotes, etc which referenced other works were overlooked though at times questions did come from them. Showing that critical analysis and complete reading was a requirement vice just reading what was written in the book in our hands as it where.
I grant at times such reference items or citations are difficult to obtain. Other times equally problematic in that they can be obtained but are in some other language, even to include old English which you may not be able to read. Thus your restricted to translations or extracts which may or may not be useful. Myself I try to read multiple translations to see how they might differ though admit that can be time consuming. Nor does that rule out the issue of presumption and assumption of word selection and meaning by the author. In that regard I tend to keep a dictionary near by and look up words for meanings, especially when used in a manner I am not familiar with.
But back to the idea which inspired this thread "Do you read the indexed or cited references?" The availability of knowledge has clearly taken great jumps in availability to the general public. Yet is the innovation of printing and publishing actually as much of an innovation as might be though? So much misinformation, misdirection and false conclusions and out and out deception is a by product. Especially in the context that many who read do not read critically nor have the prerequisite background knowledge for the available material they are reading about.
So to bring this long and probably drawn out posting to an end what do you think of both the idea of prerequisite knowledge being implied and the reader actually reading the cited or indexed references?
Comment