Ph.D candidate research assistant: Mary Magdalene
I have an acquaintance who has applied and been accepted at a Methodist University for the Ph.D. program. He called me with the great news and the immediate challenge with which he has been tasked.
Challenge: 35 page paper on "The Theories behind the heretical claims of an intimate relationship between Mary Magdalene and Jesus Christ: The basic history of the heresy.
I've been trying to get this guy to pile in on Logos for a while and he flat out told me, "If Logos is that good for research, do you want to be my research assistant?"
For me, a future seminary student, this is an opportunity for me to see how well my library stacks up for the purposes of research, so I am very excited to get to help him with this small paper. It also gives me a spy glass on the world of thesis papers; not just reading one, but developing one. Also, if it goes well, he's going to buy a large package (somewhere between Gold and Portfolio) depending on his needs for his Ph.D. I guess you could say this is the best "demo" one could really get!
With this topic in mind what do you as users, researchers, students, pastors, ect see as the "must have" resources to do intense scholarly work on the whole Mary Magdalene, Jesus Christ, and the "French Connection" conspiracies?
Thanks for some pointers.
Wilson Hines
Comments
-
Wilson Hines said:
With this topic in mind what do you as users, researchers, students, pastors, ect see as the "must have" resources to do intense scholarly work on the whole Mary Magdalene, Jesus Christ, and the "French Connection" conspiracies?
What you need to deal with are the pseudepigraphal (AKA gnostic) gospels. I'm not sure which ones specifically suggest this particular relationship, as I've never had any reason to study such a topic, nor for that matter the pseudepigraphal gospels.
Logos does offer some resources in this area, though it is specialized enough that any study would likely need to be done in a library that had an extensive section dedicated to this area of research.
There is, of course, the whole DaVinci code thing, along with the debunking of it. But that would not likely be considered scholalry research by any stretch of the imagination.
Help links: WIKI; Logos 6 FAQ. (Phil. 2:14, NIV)
0 -
One resource you might already have is "The Gospel of Mary - Beyond a Gnostic and a Biblical Mary Magdalene".
0 -
Bobby Terhune said:
One resource you might already have is "The Gospel of Mary - Beyond a Gnopstic and a Biblical Mary Magdalene".
Which is also included in the Gnostic and Apocryphal Studies Collection
There's also Darrel Bock's Breaking the Da Vinci Code, which I haven't read, but I would hope that it's footnoted to give leads to other sources.
MacBook Pro (2019), ThinkPad E540
0 -
Wow there's a lot. I just did a search on
"Mary Magdalene" Jesus intimate
WITHOUT matching all word forms, and I come up with 172 articles in 144 resources. Some good ones too about did they marry, Magdalene's sin, legends and apocrypha on Mary, Gnostic texts....
...you could probably refine further by excluding words like Lazarus, maybe...
In short, lots to research, pull up a chair and get a cup of coffee, and dive in!
0 -
sorry gentlemen, you're all off on the start of this horrific rumor.
Mary Magdalene as a prostitute began with a sermon by a pope in the 4th or 5th century. RC Sproul had the history on this, check their site as I checked my logos already and nothing there.
nancy
0 -
Nancy A. Almodovar said:
Mary Magdalene as a prostitute began with a sermon by a pope in the 4th or 5th century. RC Sproul had the history on this, check their site as I checked my logos already and nothing there.
This point is picked up in the Encyclopedia of Christianity (available standalone or in Scholar's Gold base packages up)
Nowhere in the biblical witness is Mary Magdalene referred to as a sinner or a prostitute, yet her association with NT stories featuring sinful women and/or women who overtly display their devotion to Jesus has led to her depiction in art, literature, and film as a penitent prostitute.
A composite sketch of Mary Magdalene, including pieces of each of these NT stories and the distinct women featured in them, is dramatically drawn in a sermon preached by Pope → Gregory the Great (590–604), dating from the late sixth century. In his sermon Gregory identifies Mary Magdalene with Mary of Bethany, as well as the female sinner of Luke 7 and the Mary (of Galilee?) who listens intently to Jesus while he teaches. This composite gained popularity, and Mary Magdalene became not only a model of pious devotion to Jesus and a herald of the resurrection but also a contemplative, listening at the feet of Jesus, and a symbol of true repentance (→ Penitence), the sinner who has been forgiven much and thus loves much. For centuries, the → Roman Catholic Church recognized elements of Gregory’s conflation in its configuration of feast days. Not until the 1969 reform of its liturgical calendar were different feast days appointed in the West for Mary of Bethany and Mary Magdalene.
Erwin Fahlbusch and Geoffrey William Bromiley, vol. 3, The Encyclopedia of Christianity, 447 (Grand Rapids, Mich.; Leiden, Netherlands: Wm. B. Eerdmans; Brill, 1999-2003).
Graham
0 -
Graham Criddle said:
This point is picked up in the Encyclopedia of Christianity (available standalone or in Scholar's Gold base packages up)
That is a good article. It also goes on to discuss Mary Magdalene in the Gnostic literature:
In several of the documents included in the Nag Hammadi library, Mary Magdalene plays a major role among the disciples. The writings that mention Mary date from the second to the fourth centuries and are written from a Gnostic point of view. Elements of the canonical witness are present in their portrait of Mary, including her being a disciple of Jesus in Galilee and a witness to the resurrection.
These documents, however, further develop Mary into a disciple who is particularly loved and honored by Jesus. She is both a companion to Jesus and a conversation partner, so treasured that the male disciples, particularly Peter, become jealous. In Pistis Sophia, a Gnostic document found prior to the discovery of the Nag Hammadi library, Mary is the chief dialogue partner of Jesus, asking 39 of 64 questions. Competition between Peter and Mary surfaces in the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Mary (Magdalene) and Pistis Sophia. The Gospel of Philip (63, 34–37) includes the observation that “the Savior loved her more than all the disciples.”
Fahlbusch, E., & Bromiley, G. W. (1999-2003). Vol. 3: The encyclopedia of Christianity (447). Grand Rapids, Mich.; Leiden, Netherlands: Wm. B. Eerdmans; Brill.MacBook Pro (2019), ThinkPad E540
0 -
I searched my entire library for "Mary Magdalene" NEAR (intimate, sexual, relationship, kiss). The following hits were most useful:
- AYBD will direct you to Gospel of Thomas 114, and Gospel of Philip 63-64. These are the key Gnostic writings. If you don't have GoP, there's a brief transcript in BAR.
- Jesus in the Nag Hammadi Writings has more on GoP and Mary.
The Cited by Tool on The Gospel of Thomas 114 will pick up several more references (or just do a search). You can do something similar for GoP.
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
Sorry, should have added that the Nag Hammadi library is essential as a primary source. Jesus in the Nag Hammadi Writings ought to be useful, though I've not read it, as ought the various resources on the Gospel of Thomas.
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
My word! What responsiveness and help!
Thanks to everybody.
According to what I am seeing, I am not missing much. I am now serious about the Anchor Yale Bible Reference Library and Gnostic & Apocryphal Studies Collection (10 vols.); especially the later. I have the Nag Hammadi in English and as a SESB 3 user I have the primary sources in the original language and a coptic lex, and also a commentary that is also in the primary source resource. I have three years of Greek and he has two + 15 years of ministry. So, if we need to learn some coptic, we won't be flying blind and we should be able to deal with any textual issues between the two of us. Who knows what all will happen? I can't wait!
Mark, I do have a particular question for you: Remember, I am an undergrad going for a B.A. in History, research. My department head just made an announcement last week that encyclopedias are not acceptable material from which to draw. She, btw, has just finished her Ph.D (Napoleonic Studies Thesis) a couple years ago. I was not the violator, but initially I wondered "why?". This being said, would this be a problem in a seminary? Next, what about a dictionary like the ABD?
This paper he is having to write is "pre-entry" and is not intended to be his finished thesis by any stretch. The only reason he is having to do this, I assume, is so his professors can see what kind of work he knows how to do.
He said, "I really want to knock their socks off!" I told him, "Their from Kentucky, how hard can that be?" ROFLOL
Wilson Hines
0 -
Wilson Hines said:
"Their from Kentucky, how hard can that be?" ROFLOL
Yeah Wilson. They probably don't know the difference between "Their" & "They're".....................[:O]
Do they wear socks in Kentucky? I'll have to ask my senior pastor. I think he started wearing shoes in grad school. [*-)]
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Matthew C Jones said:Wilson Hines said:
"Their from Kentucky, how hard can that be?" ROFLOL
Yeah Wilson. They probably don't know the difference between "Their" & "They're".....................
Do they wear socks in Kentucky? I'll have to ask my senior pastor. I think he started wearing shoes in grad school.
ROFLOL, I know the difference man! I was typing fast as a hornet! LOL.
It was a joke, smile about it. I am from rural North Carolina. I'm at the end of everybody's jokes.
Normally, I'd go up and fix a typo like that, but in the context of this scholarly discussion I am leaving it for the cultural diversity of this group ROFLOL.
My pastor is from "Kentrucky" too. Some of the best people I've ever met were from Kentucky.
Wilson Hines
0 -
As others have already said, I would check out the Nag Hammadi Library, especially the Gospel of Mary (p.524). Here is the link to the resource on Logos' website:
http://www.logos.com/product/4240/the-nag-hammadi-library-in-english-4th-rev-ed
It lists for $66, but if you don't already have it I would contact customer sales to see if they can give you a good deal.
0 -
Wilson Hines said:
My department head just made an announcement last week that encyclopedias are not acceptable material from which to draw. She, btw, has just finished her Ph.D (Napoleonic Studies Thesis) a couple years ago. I was not the violator, but initially I wondered "why?". This being said, would this be a problem in a seminary? Next, what about a dictionary like the ABD?
The same goes in seminary as in other academic studies. An encyclopedia or dictionary, even one that is as in-depth as ABD, would generally not be an acceptable source to quote. Such articles are summarizing research that someone else has done. They will give you a bibliography of their sources. So such articles are fine as a first stop to get your head around the scope of a subject and get some references to follow up on. But you should find the original sources, read them yourself and draw your own conclusions from them, not quote the encyclopedia or dictionary article.
0 -
Mark Barnes said:
I searched my entire library for "Mary Magdalene" NEAR (intimate, sexual, relationship, kiss).
The odd thing is that everyone assumes that the word "kiss" is in the manuscript. That word is missing because there is a break or crack in the manuscript, but most people assume that is the word the author would have used (they are probably correct). In "The DaVinci Code" Tom Hanks interrupts Ian McClellan just as he is about to say "kiss" in his quotation of "The Gospel of Thomas." How fitting!
0 -
I can't imagine having to waste my time to study such silliness...what a horrible "task".
ASUS ProArt x570s Creator, AMD R9 5950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, ASUS Strix RTX 2080 ti
"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not." Little children...Biblical prophecy is not Christianity's friend.
0 -
Nancy A. Almodovar said:
Mary Magdalene as a prostitute began with a sermon by a pope in the 4th or 5th century. RC Sproul had the history on this, check their site as I checked my logos already and nothing there.
or more recent research would say "The Mary Magdalen of medieval legend was a composite figure who had her
origins in the Biblical passages about three different women - not just
the woman explicitly called Mary Magdalen in the Gospels, but also Mary
of Bethany, sister of Martha and Lazarus, and the unnamed female sinner
who washed Christ's feet with her tears. Biblical exegetes in the Latin
West tended to equate the three from the time of Gregory the Great on,
but the various New Testament passages about these women were first
woven into a single narrative vita in a tenth-century sermon attributed to Odo of Cluny."This is more likely because the composite is Latin West ... if it were from Gregory, it would most likely be more common in the East. Any way you look at it, it is a gradual folk development over time not a single initiating event.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
David Paul said:
I can't imagine having to waste my time to study such silliness
Some of us find it fun and entertaining ... a real source of insight into humanity.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
Could someone translate this into plain English for me? I have read it several times and still can't comprehend their point.[:$]
Is it just that Christ reacted differently than Joseph did...concerning adultery? I guess what puzzles me most is the phrase "The justifiableness of qualifications of this kind."
"In the present instance, it is to be understood by the reverent reader of the history that Joseph, as “a just man,” felt he had no choice but (1) to put away the woman who seemed to have erred; (2) to put her away privily, in order to avoid both public scandal as far as possible and unadvisable aggravation of her and his own feelings. The justifiableness of qualifications of this kind is amply illustrated by the conduct of Christ himself, alike in the instance of the woman “taken in adultery,” and in that of Mary Magdalene.—B."
The Pulpit Commentary: St. Matthew Vol. I. 2004 (H. D. M. Spence-Jones, Ed.) (18). Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.
~
0 -
Wilson Hines said:
Mark, I do have a particular question for you: Remember, I am an undergrad going for a B.A. in History, research. My department head just made an announcement last week that encyclopedias are not acceptable material from which to draw. She, btw, has just finished her Ph.D (Napoleonic Studies Thesis) a couple years ago. I was not the violator, but initially I wondered "why?". This being said, would this be a problem in a seminary? Next, what about a dictionary like the ABD?
Standards will no doubt differ on my side of the Atlantic to yours and certainly between disciplines. But there are at least two exceptions to the rule. First, throughout the English-speaking world, in Biblical Studies, it is extremely common to find citations from TDNT in doctoral theses, so dictionaries/encylopaedias are not always unacceptable. But the point is that TDNT is a dictionary which contains a lot of original work - it is not just a summary of the work of others. I think that's the key point. At doctoral level your sources should be the resources where ideas originated and were developed, not where they were summarised. For example, in my own PhD thesis I cite AYBD's article on the Italian Cohort. The amount of literature on the Cohort is tiny (just a handful of journal articles), and not all the content in AYBD was in those articles.
But there's a second reason I cite AYBD here, and that's the second exception. My thesis has nothing really to with the history of the Roman Imperial Army. At only one place, and in a relatively minor way does my thesis cross over into this area. The point I'm supporting is not so vital that it's worth me becoming an expert. Frankly, I'd rather not make the point than spend days and weeks scouring the primary sources in libraries many miles from here. So it's quite acceptable to cite high-quality articles written by people in my field (Biblical Studies) that summarise other fields (Roman Military History), when the point you're making is sufficiently minor not to warrant a full-scale investigation.
So at doctoral level, don't use dictionaries unless (a) they contain original research, or (b) they're high quality and summarise information from a different discipline which you're using to support a non-essential point.
My citation of AYBD above was therefore designed to help you (and others) see how Logos could help identify the source, so the process was:
- Use a dictionary to find the key primary texts.
- Search for citations of those primary texts to find the key literature that discusses them.
- Develop your argument from that key literature.
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
Jeremy said:
The odd thing is that everyone assumes that the word "kiss" is in the manuscript. That word is missing because there is a break or crack in the manuscript, but most people assume that is the word the author would have used (they are probably correct). In "The DaVinci Code" Tom Hanks interrupts Ian McClellan just as he is about to say "kiss" in his quotation of "The Gospel of Thomas." How fitting!
The word "kiss" is in the manuscript. Where Jesus kissed her is in question. Also, this quote is found in the Gospel of Philip, not Thomas.
0 -
David Paul said:
I can't imagine having to waste my time to study such silliness...what a horrible "task".
It absolutely isn't my favorite thing to work on either. But, let me tell you why it isn't such silliness: As of a year ago, he had sold 80 million copies of that one book. It is being sold as a fact, not a novel; for which it actually is a novel.
What do you do or say when a person comes in your office, if you're a pastor, and says, "Pastor, after reading the Da Vinci Code I just am not sure I believe in the Gospel message anymore." What do you answer him with and where do you find it? I know of a couple pastors whom have been hit with questions or statements such as this.
Wilson Hines
0 -
Mark, again you've out done yourself. Heck, all I was asking was resource advice originally and some of these guy have written the thing (j/k'n).
I called my sales rep last night and got quotes on the "Gnostic & Apocryphal Studies Collection (10 vols.)" and the Bible Review Archive. I am not so sure I need to plunk down on all that for this project, but I am willing. I see this as an opportunity for me on so many different levels, and titles like these would be fantastic for my seminary work, as well. He is paying me to help, so I'll just make that a book fund LOL.
You see what I mean guys, I just giddy about this mess. The department head for the college I am transferring to told me we had a 60 page thesis the last year of my B.A. in History. I smiled and he said, "I rarely see a student get excited about a 60 page thesis, son." My reply was "I just love this mess!"
Wilson Hines
0 -
I would say what you did...it's all fiction, that Dan Brown himself admits it's fiction, and none of that foolishness is in the Bible. I would also probably go over the parable of the sower, focusing particularly on the seed among thorns...and cover the verse about cleverly devised fables...just for a start.
ASUS ProArt x570s Creator, AMD R9 5950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, ASUS Strix RTX 2080 ti
"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not." Little children...Biblical prophecy is not Christianity's friend.
0 -
David Paul said:
I would say what you did...it's all fiction, that Dan Brown himself admits it's fiction, and none of that foolishness is in the Bible. I would also probably go over the parable of the sower, focusing particularly on the seed among thorns...and cover the verse about cleverly devised fables...just for a start.
Yes, but Dan Brown wasn't the first to bring up those stories. They'd been floating around for some time, and they do deserve to be solidly debunked. For some people saying "it isn't in the Bible" isn't sufficient for debunking. There are a lot of things about Jesus that were not written down in the Bible (John 20:30; John 21:25). I admire someone for doing the solid research to find out where this conflation of Marys first cropped up. It is so often repeated as fact that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute, that people often don't realize it isn't that way in the Bible.
0 -
Wilson Hines said:
It is being sold as a fact, not a novel; for which it actually is a novel.
Are you sure? My copy has the classification of fiction on it and has the normal disclaimer for fiction. In fact, I found it a quite enjoyable, quick read ... a veg-out and enjoy it type of book.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
MJ. Smith said:
Are you sure?
I assume Rosie is referring to the frontispiece which says something to the effect that although the story is fiction, the historical details are factual.
MJ. Smith said:In fact, I found it a quite enjoyable, quick read ... a veg-out and enjoy it type of book.
I read my copy before the fuss and enjoyed it too - largely because I missed the claim in the frontispiece, and it never occurred to me that anyone would take it's representation of history seriously!
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
Rosie Perera said:
those stories. They'd been floating around for some time, and they do deserve to be solidly debunked.
Oh, likely 1900 years or so ... perhaps a bit more. They've been thoroughly debunked a number of times but good stories always manage to transform themselves and reappear. Admittedly, when the cathedral held their book debunking lecture they expected 20-30 ... they overflowed so much they split into two nights ... or at least that's the story as one participant (not me) tells it. I find more people who only know Mary Magdalene from the Easter reading - and need to be reminded that she does appear elsewhere. So I just chill and enjoy a good laugh.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
Rosie Perera said:
The same goes in seminary as in other academic studies. An encyclopedia or dictionary, even one that is as in-depth as ABD, would generally not be an acceptable source to quote. Such articles are summarizing research that someone else has done.
What is the difference between hiring a "research assistant" like Wilson or quoting AYBD? Submitting from either source would be prohibited by most plagiarism clauses. I have never heard of "research assistants" being allowed in work submitted by a candidate for a degree. The whole point of the entry exam is to determine if the candidate possesses the skills necessary to create original work from the seminal idea to fruition. (We all know Wilson is game! [:P] )
I am aware there are textbooks published in the name of a professor that were in fact written by undergraduate students of the professor (and it is usually painfully obvious.) But the professor had already earned his degree and the substandard textbook was not part of the process leading to degree conferral.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Mark Barnes said:MJ. Smith said:
Are you sure?
I assume Rosie is referring to the frontispiece which says something to the effect that although the story is fiction, the historical details are factual.
MJ. Smith said:In fact, I found it a quite enjoyable, quick read ... a veg-out and enjoy it type of book.
I read my copy before the fuss and enjoyed it too - largely because I missed the claim in the frontispiece, and it never occurred to me that anyone would take it's representation of history seriously!
Edit: That quote was meant for M.J.
Yes, I am dead certain. It may be found on a book shelf with other fiction books, but honestly when it is first released you and I know well it, like many books, is paraded in the front by the door of all the big and small bookstores. It is the way it is marketed, not shelved, that has given it so much credibility.
Wilson Hines
0 -
Matthew C Jones said:Rosie Perera said:
The same goes in seminary as in other academic studies. An encyclopedia or dictionary, even one that is as in-depth as ABD, would generally not be an acceptable source to quote. Such articles are summarizing research that someone else has done.
What is the difference between hiring a "research assistant" like Wilson or quoting AYBD? Submitting from either source would be prohibited by most plagiarism clauses. I have never heard of "research assistants" being allowed in work submitted by a candidate for a degree. The whole point of the entry exam is to determine if the candidate possesses the skills necessary to create original work from the seminal idea to fruition. (We all know Wilson is game!
)I am aware there are textbooks published in the name of a professor that were in fact written by undergraduate students of the professor (and it is usually painfully obvious.) But the professor had already earned his degree and the substandard textbook was not part of the process leading to degree conferral.
My title for this thread is much in jest. Much of the time I will post a thread with a shocking, funny or interesting title to grab the potential reader's attention. It worked.
I am not his research assistant, in a way that would have me writing for him. Instead, I am simply going through my library and resources and seeing if my stuff can help him. There's isn't that much difference between him coming to my house and him going to the Duke University Library, other than depth of content.
Wilson Hines
0 -
Wilson Hines said:David Paul said:
I can't imagine having to waste my time to study such silliness...what a horrible "task".
It absolutely isn't my favorite thing to work on either. But, let me tell you why it isn't such silliness: As of a year ago, he had sold 80 million copies of that one book. It is being sold as a fact, not a novel; for which it actually is a novel.
What do you do or say when a person comes in your office, if you're a pastor, and says, "Pastor, after reading the Da Vinci Code I just am not sure I believe in the Gospel message anymore." What do you answer him with and where do you find it? I know of a couple pastors whom have been hit with questions or statements such as this.
Very good assessment. It is a sad fact many people get their Bible doctrine from pop culture. The challenge of today's pastors is to meet the people where they are; just like Jesus did. Even if those people are ignorant and easily misled.
MJ. Smith said:Some of us find it fun and entertaining ... a real source of insight into humanity.
Most times it is humorous to see how silly people can get. Sometimes it can get downright scary. There is a certain preacher, a prolific writer, who claims we know Jesus was not a Jew because God would not be born into a "mongrel race" such as the Jewish people. While this is obviously stupid reasoning, the preacher does have a following. It is good to at least be aware of pop theology to help those who may have bought into it.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Matthew C Jones said:Rosie Perera said:
The same goes in seminary as in other academic studies. An encyclopedia or dictionary, even one that is as in-depth as ABD, would generally not be an acceptable source to quote. Such articles are summarizing research that someone else has done.
What is the difference between hiring a "research assistant" like Wilson or quoting AYBD? Submitting from either source would be prohibited by most plagiarism clauses.
Quoting from AYBD is not plagiarism if you footnote your source with proper citation. It's just that AYBD isn't considered an original source to quote from, so it is lazy to quote from it instead of going to the original sources that it provides for you. It's not unethical, just isn't considered very good scholarship. However it's fine to use AYBD to lead you to good sources. That's not plagiarism either.
Using a research assistant in the way Wilson is suggesting isn't very different from using AYBD in that latter way, as a launching pad for your own research. Professors do it all the time. I'm not sure whether it is considered unethical for PhD candidates to do it, but I'm guessing it's not. There would be no way to prove you'd done it anyway. People share bibliographies all the time. The bibliography in the back of a book is public knowledge, so if you read a good book in your field and then add most of the books that are in its bibliography to your own growing list of resources you want to follow up on, there's nothing wrong with that.
0 -
Rosie Perera said:
Using a research assistant in the way Wilson is suggesting isn't very different from using AYBD in that latter way, as a launching pad for your own research. Professors do it all the time. I'm not sure whether it is considered unethical for PhD candidates to do it, but I'm guessing it's not.
I am aware that many professors do this (after they have attained their graduate degrees.) In the same way, lawyers use legal aides to research case law to build their presentation. Back in the 1990's I applied to a law school. The process included a packet of legal briefs that I was assigned to research and suggest strategies for filing appeals. It also strictly forbade the assistance of anyone in the formation of those appeals. The work was to be exclusively mine. Citing references was required, enlisting help to find those references was banned. The process did serve one function well. After seeing what really goes into good lawyering, I decided I did not enjoy it. Too much nose-in-the-books and not enough "Perry Mason" moments.
Rosie Perera said:There would be no way to prove you'd done it anyway.
Unless you post it in a public forum. [:|]
In regards to banning encyclopedic sources, I'd like to see what the history professor drew on for her Napoleonic thesis. (I've got micro fische of Napoleon's daily secret service reports, in case she is interested. [:-*] ) I find AYBD and Encyclopaedia Britannica to be highly reputable and the best starting point for finding source materials.Rosie Perera said:It's just that AYBD isn't considered an original source to quote from, so it is lazy to quote from it instead of going to the original sources that it provides for you. It's not unethical, just isn't considered very good scholarship. However it's fine to use AYBD to lead you to good sources. That's not plagiarism either.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Matthew C Jones said:Rosie Perera said:
Using a research assistant in the way Wilson is suggesting isn't very different from using AYBD in that latter way, as a launching pad for your own research. Professors do it all the time. I'm not sure whether it is considered unethical for PhD candidates to do it, but I'm guessing it's not.
I am aware that many professors do this (after they have attained their graduate degrees.) In the same way, lawyers use legal aides to research case law to build their presentation. Back in the 1990's I applied to a law school. The process included a packet of legal briefs that I was assigned to research and suggest strategies for filing appeals. It also strictly forbade the assistance of anyone in the formation of those appeals. The work was to be exclusively mine. Citing references was required, enlisting help to find those references was banned. The process did serve one function well. After seeing what really goes into good lawyering, I decided I did not enjoy it. Too much nose-in-the-books and not enough "Perry Mason" moments.
Rosie Perera said:There would be no way to prove you'd done it anyway.
Unless you post it in a public forum.
In regards to banning encyclopedic sources, I'd like to see what the history professor drew on for her Napoleonic thesis. (I've got micro fische of Napoleon's daily secret service reports, in case she is interested.Rosie Perera said:It's just that AYBD isn't considered an original source to quote from, so it is lazy to quote from it instead of going to the original sources that it provides for you. It's not unethical, just isn't considered very good scholarship. However it's fine to use AYBD to lead you to good sources. That's not plagiarism either.
) I find AYBD and Encyclopaedia Britannica to be highly reputable and the best starting point for finding source materials.
Matthew, you're way over playing this whole gig, man. AND you're gett'n me down.
Wilson Hines
0 -
Wilson Hines said:
over playing this whole gig, man. AND you're gett'n me down.
OK. You're probably right. I will cease & desist.
Cheer up. I think you are an excellent candidate for a PhD and a ThD. You personally have the gumption to chase this one down with the greatest of enthusiasm. You are a role model for the rest of us and your friend is blessed to have you in his counsel.
Carry on Wilson. And God bless you.
postscript: I really DO have Napoleon's documents. When Ambassador's College (in Texas) closed I bought many file cabinets of microfilm & fische from the auction of their library holdings. I've got theological journals from the 1800's -- all public domain & waiting to be scanned into Logos! Anybody want to loan me a film scanner?
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
David Paul said:
I can't imagine having to waste my time to study such silliness...what a horrible "task".
I think it is important to have an understanding of the how, where and why of these heresies.
0 -
Matthew C Jones said:
I really DO have Napoleon's documents. When Ambassador's College (in Texas) closed I bought many file cabinets of microfilm & fische from the auction of their library holdings. I've got theological journals from the 1800's -- all public domain & waiting to be scanned into Logos! Anybody want to loan me a film scanner?
Awesome! Logos should consider buying a film scanner if they don't have one already. I have one (for 35mm slides; not sure if it would do microfilm and fische) but am not willing to lend it out since I need it too often. They're not all that expensive, compared to the book scanner Logos has.
0 -
Matthew C Jones said:Wilson Hines said:
over playing this whole gig, man. AND you're gett'n me down.
postscript: I really DO have Napoleon's documents. When Ambassador's College (in Texas) closed I bought many file cabinets of microfilm & fische from the auction of their library holdings. I've got theological journals from the 1800's -- all public domain & waiting to be scanned into Logos! Anybody want to loan me a film scanner?
I'm not sure, since she has her Ph.D. now (had it a couple years) and that is probably the last thing she wants to study as a busy department head. When we worked on France in our World History class she spent half of the semester on Napoleon; she's sharp as an egg.
Wilson Hines
0 -
MacBook Pro (2019), ThinkPad E540
0 -
Oh, I've told her that in person. Mercy, I probably would tell you that too! That's my code word for "You're cool!"
Wilson Hines
0 -
Wilson Hines said:
Oh, I've told her that in person. Mercy, I probably would tell you that too! That's my code word for "You're cool!"
Thanks! I'll be the fried egg, 'cause I like them best.
MacBook Pro (2019), ThinkPad E540
0
