- Options
- Login
- Desktop Style
Options
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT (well, sort of)
- IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT (well, sort of)
-
RE: IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT (well, sort of)
MHTamdgidi_(Behrooz) > 5 hours ago
(7 hours ago)proto57 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(8 hours ago)MHTamdgidi_(Behrooz) Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Regarding marginalia’s significance for understanding the Voynich manuscript, I think it has to be put in perspective. It could involve as much a misunderstanding and “hallucination” about the VM as some of our own tries today, AI assisted or not.
True, and it is also important to remember that the last page marginalia is written in the same ink as the Voynich main text. So by whomever, meaning whatever, it was applied about the same time as the author of the Voynich did, and from the same inkwell. That knowledge might be helpful, in some way, to understanding its meaning and purpose.
Thanks for your note. I agree that, if the ink proves to be of the same ink, it would mean it was written by the scribe. However, following what Jorge_Stolfi has noted, it is possible that a scribe may not have known exactly the meaning of some of the texts or images as well. I am really not decided on the extent of that knowledge. It could be just a scribing of what (in my view) Margaret left them. I am more inclined on that route now. In that case, I would not readily assume the marginalia author (if a scribe) also knew, and may be speculating. So, I am open to your point, but it is hard to know without further investigation and finding. -
RE: IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT (well, sort of)
MHTamdgidi_(Behrooz) > 5 hours ago
(6 hours ago)oshfdk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(8 hours ago)MHTamdgidi_(Behrooz) Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.To make a blank statement that showmanship skills increases scientific value is not helpful at all.
If you are referring to my comments, this is not at all what I said. What I said was "an essential part of having a successful career in academia is at least a little bit of good showmanship". I didn't say anything about scientific value. Showmanship would equally help spread wrong and harmful ideas. But showmanship definitely helps promoting one's ideas, no matter if valuable or not.
Thanks for your reply. Yes, I was referring to your point, but did NOT assume you were making blanket statements, so in a way I was myself making a broader statement that you seem to also agree, since you are saying both possibilities as well. I think your general point is that it is not enough for a scientist to discover new findings but be able to communicate them effectively. I think that is a valid point. But if the communication becomes a distraction from the learning and teaching, then it can become counterproductive. I think the topic is worthy of more thinking and examples and I will think more about it. -
RE: IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT (well, sort of)
MHTamdgidi_(Behrooz) > 5 hours ago
(5 hours ago)MHTamdgidi_(Behrooz) Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(6 hours ago)oshfdk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(8 hours ago)MHTamdgidi_(Behrooz) Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.To make a blank statement that showmanship skills increases scientific value is not helpful at all.
If you are referring to my comments, this is not at all what I said. What I said was "an essential part of having a successful career in academia is at least a little bit of good showmanship". I didn't say anything about scientific value. Showmanship would equally help spread wrong and harmful ideas. But showmanship definitely helps promoting one's ideas, no matter if valuable or not.
Thanks for your reply. Yes, I was referring to your point, but did NOT assume you were making blanket statements, so in a way I was myself making a broader statement that you seem to also agree, since you are saying both possibilities as well. I think your general point is that it is not enough for a scientist to discover new findings but be able to communicate them effectively. I think that is a valid point. But if the communication becomes a distraction from the learning and teaching, then it can become counterproductive. I think the topic is worthy of more thinking and examples and I will think more about it.
Sorry, there was a typo in my last post, I meant to say "NOT" in the first line. So, I corrected it in the above. -
RE: IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT (well, sort of)
eggyk > 5 hours ago
(5 hours ago)MHTamdgidi_(Behrooz) Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Sorry, there was a typo in my last post, I meant to say "NOT" in the first line. So, I corrected it in the above.
Just so you know, you can edit your posts for a while after you make them.
Also, this thread is great.
Throwing that anagram in there for us was like throwing fish food into a pond of hungry fish! -
RE: IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT (well, sort of)
MHTamdgidi_(Behrooz) > 4 hours ago
(5 hours ago)eggyk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(5 hours ago)MHTamdgidi_(Behrooz) Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Sorry, there was a typo in my last post, I meant to say "NOT" in the first line. So, I corrected it in the above.
Just so you know, you can edit your posts for a while after you make them.
Also, this thread is great.
Throwing that anagram in there for us was like throwing fish food into a pond of hungry fish!
Very helpful tip! Thanks a lot! I corrected it! I agree that it is helpful to have this conversation thanks to Jorge_Solfi! -
RE: IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT (well, sort of)
Jorge_Stolfi > 4 hours ago
(Yesterday, 12:18 PM)oshfdk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I think, as an outsider, that an essential part of having a successful career in academia is at least a little bit of good showmanship, or maybe even more than a little bit. It certainly helps to add some virality to have your ideas recognized on a large scale. So, I'm not at all surprised by this approach, and I also think the academia is not the only place where this works to one's advantage, so I will be taking notes
"Academia" is a quite large space, and there are all sorts of people in there. From high-level criminals to saints, from geniuses to frauds, from aspergers who are happier with computers and retorts than with people to stars who care only for popular fame.
Media exposure can help one's career, as t will go in one's resume, and promotion committees cannot avoid taking note of it. Schools also benefit from it: I bet that 90% of the people who have heard of Yale University know it only as "that university where the VMS is now".
Unfortunately the scientific "finds" that get the most media attention tend to be the bogus ones; because, unlike real finds, they can be as exciting as one wants. There are examples in all areas. But I have been watching many archaeology videos lately, and here are some "notable finds from last year that got significant media attention:- A British Archaeologist claimed to have found the quarry of the bluestones of Stonehenge, implying that the stones were carried by the Neolithic builders for more than 100 km. He claimed to have identified their "workshop" and even an improvised "work bench" at the quarry. But geologists noted that glaciers and icebergs millions of years ago carried thousands of rocks like those for much larger distances and deposited them all over southern England. And the "workshop" was just a random pile of rocks. Guess which of the two guys got interviewed by the BBC and newspapers.
- A large team of archaeologists and other scientists explored a cave that had been used in Neolithic times, and, in a large room at lower level where sunlight did not reach, found a single boulder with half a dozen crisscrossed lines scratched onto it. After much microscopic analysis and computer modeling, they concluded that the boulder was a crude depiction of a turtle shell, and that the room had been a primitive temple where a hundred people would meet, in the light of torches, for some Turtle Cult rituals. Never mind that the room had probably been full of water at that time, and there were no other signs of human presence in it.
- A pair of French archaeologists examined a tiny sandstone cave, which apparently served as temporary shelter for Neolithic hunters. It was barely big enough for 2-3 people sitting. But they identified some grooves on the floor of the cave as a map of the rivers in the region. Never mind that the grooves looked just like those made by natural erosion. Oh, and they also identified a crack on the wall as a representation of female genitalia, obviously related to a cult.
- An Israeli archaeologist found a small lump of baked clay, 10'000 years old or more, with traces of ocher. It does not look like anything, but he expertly identified it as the statuette of a woman carrying a swan on her back, which obviously meant that she was a shaman of a swan cult.
- Even more recently, a Greek archaeologist cracked the mystery of the Phaistos disk, by identifying it as a board game -- like our Monopoly, or a spiral board game that was actually played in ancient Egypt. (He did not elaborate on the rules of the Phaistos game; but I suppose that, when one of the players reached the central square with his tiny tiny pebble, the disk was turned over to continue the play on the other side.)
All the best, --stolfi - A British Archaeologist claimed to have found the quarry of the bluestones of Stonehenge, implying that the stones were carried by the Neolithic builders for more than 100 km. He claimed to have identified their "workshop" and even an improvised "work bench" at the quarry. But geologists noted that glaciers and icebergs millions of years ago carried thousands of rocks like those for much larger distances and deposited them all over southern England. And the "workshop" was just a random pile of rocks. Guess which of the two guys got interviewed by the BBC and newspapers.
-
RE: IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT (well, sort of)
Koen G > 4 hours ago
As a counterpoint, I strongly believe in the duty of science to communicate in a way that's understandable and engaging for the layman. Why are you researching this? What's interesting about it? What does this new discovery actually mean? What are the benefits for other fields? How does this change our understanding of the past and present?
And to do that, you need all kinds of people in science. From the awkward neurodivergent to the rockstar. Ideally, all scientists should strive to produce legible texts and reach out to the public. But you need star power to break the walls of the ivory tower and to close the gap between intellectual elites and the rest of the country.
And these don't have to be people that want to be in the media all the time. Just your most fluent speakers, those with the gift to put into words what it's all about. Those with contagious enthusiasm and love for their field. -
RE: IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT (well, sort of)
nablator > 3 hours ago
-
RE: IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT (well, sort of)
Koen G > 3 hours ago
Dpsmypk pz aol Ylayhjly