All search confessional blend: observation and suggestion
Let me start by stating this and hoping that it will be respected by those who might want to reply: I AM NOT SEEKING NOR WANTING TO OPEN A CONTROVERSIAL DEBATE.
All I would like to do is 2 things:
(1) Point out to newbies or less experienced users that All search pulls from any resource in the Logos catalog regardless of confession. The synopsis may incorporate results from adventists, lutherans, pentecostals, catholics, orthodox, etc. Whether or not you welcome it, just be aware that such is the case.
(2) Suggest that whether or not some welcome it, Logos should give users choice over that. It is, of course, possible to limit searches to one's own library by smart searching in Books if it is one's preference to search within their preferred confessional pool. However, part of the advantage of All search is to find results in what one does not have. There needs to be a medium option between Books and All which for some will be a choice between not enough vs. too much. Perhaps this will be taken care of by settings the dev team is working on to add to smart searches. I just wanted to put this on the map.
Again, please can we refrain from the usual urges of those who would feel they have to share their enlightened views on how open we should be to other confessions or not? This post is about pointing a fact about how All search works and making a suggestion, not arguing a position.
Comments
-
There needs to be a medium option between Books and All
I can certainly see the value in this.
But I'm not sure how this medium ground would be defined. Would you be looking for something along denominational grounds where, for example, you could specify Search all lutheran?
if so, that would probably require further denominational tagging on all resources in the catalog.
Or were you thinking of a different approach.
0 -
I asked a similar question here. See also the answer:
We've deliberately kept the UI for Smart Bible search as minimal as possible to give you as much freedom as you need to create your search. You can search for catholic views of justification or something similar to get (for example) James 2:24 very near the top of the results, or reformed views of justification giving Ephesians 2:8-9 very near the top.
0 -
@Graham Criddle again, trying to avoid opening a controversial can of worms, let's just say that before All search became what it has become, Logos' choice to sell resources and libraries in all kinds of confessions based on their chosen criteria of christendom could be easily circumvented. One just did not buy what they did not want to buy. In that context, confessional tagging was perhaps not as high a priority. But now, All search has marketed itself as a major new feature and with it comes this issue. So indeed, maybe resources need to be more systematically tagged. There are at least a number of publishers that are confession-specific.
An alternate idea to tagging: if adding a confessional argument to a smart search works, why not make these arguments into settings instead? So instead of listing Wesleyan, Charismatic and Baptist, one could check or uncheck all three. This would circumvent tagging at resource level though it may err from time to time.0 -
"Logos should give users choice over that.It is, of course, possible to limit searches to one's own library by smart searching in Books if it is one's preference to search within their preferred confessional pool. However, part of the advantage of All search is to find results in what one does not have."@Francis Thank you for that suggestion, I like the concept you propose. However, as @Graham Criddle stated, this would require denominational/confessional data be added to all resources. Unfortunately Logos has only attempted to add this data or tagging to Bible commentaries to some degree. It also seems that many authors prefer not to list that information in their bio info which makes it more difficult to determine.
I attempt to tag resources myself by researching the author, but this is difficult, time consuming and not very successful for me. I hope Logos will soon start adding this data to all resources. The option presented in @NichtnurBibelleser post above is an alternative until that happens.
Too soon old. Too late smart.
0 -
I would think that Smart search could be modified to incorporate filters such as Denominational filters without the need for the user to explicitly specify these in every query. Every filter that the user checks would be invisibly applied to the query.
I think AI should be able to (eventually if not already) perform these filtered searches without the need for additional tagging from Logos.
0 -
I would think that Smart search could be modified to incorporate filters such as Denominational filters without the need for the user to explicitly specify these in every query. Every filter that the user checks would be invisibly applied to the query.
This strikes me as a good solution. Another approach might be to piggyback off the concept of prioritizing resources, and allow users to "deprioritize" resources. In other words, a Lutheran might choose to deprioritize Catholic resources, and a Catholic might choose to deprioritize Reformed resources, and so on. That would allow us to continue to benefit from resources outside our own tradition, but to push them to the bottom of the list, so to speak.
0 -
Another approach might be to piggyback off the concept of prioritizing resources, and allow users to "deprioritize" resources
This would require us to be able to prioritise resources we don't own which is not currently possible - and I would be surprised if it were implemented.
0 -
In other words, a Lutheran might choose to deprioritize Catholic resources, and a Catholic might choose to deprioritize Reformed resources, and so on.
Thank you, @EastTN , you inadvertently gave me an example of the point I was going to make. While Lutheran and Catholics may differ on theology, they very much intermingle in Biblical research to the point that as a Catholic I was taught to look at Lutheran publishers for Bible commentaries and monographs. On the other hand, we hear from some in the forums who wish materials always reflect their view. I've been told in the forums that there is going to be a push to get denominational tags on Bible commentaries, so I needn't report missing tags. Assuming that tagging is done, I would like to simply have a global setting where I can set one or more preferred theological strains. This allows groups with few references such as Messianic Jews or Anabaptists to select additional groups for a more reasonably sized pool of resources. While it would be nice to have the prioritization apply more widely, if it simply applied to the top results used to create the synopsis, it would create the feel of denominational customizations while preserving the best of the "discover scholars outside your tradition" aspect of Logos.
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 -
Thank you, @EastTN , you inadvertently gave me an example of the point I was going to make. While Lutheran and Catholics may differ on theology, they very much intermingle in Biblical research to the point that as a Catholic I was taught to look at Lutheran publishers for Bible commentaries and monographs.
Always happy to help! 😉
Assuming that tagging is done, I would like to simply have a global setting where I can set one or more preferred theological strains. This allows groups with few references such as Messianic Jews or Anabaptists to select additional groups for a more reasonably sized pool of resources.
That approach would work for me.
As an aside, in my ideal world the degree of prioritization (or perhaps type of prioritization) would depend on the type of resourse. For instance, I don't care if a lexicon, grammar, or history is written by a militant atheist, as long as it's well done. I've benefited from technical commentaries written by non-believers. I'm pickier when it comes to theological works. But getting to that level of refinement is likely a pipe dream.
0
