My main critique of Logos to this day...
Hi all! I LOVE LOGOS! 
I have been using it since it was, like, Libronix or something.
But some help please. To this day, I still find it easier to hop onto Bing or Google for a quick question like "Aaron's son's names" than to use Logos. In this case, online the very first answer had them written right there in front of me... .02 seconds to find it or whatever.
Let's say I took the time in Logos, how would you have recommended I phrase the search, within Bible Search, I assume?
Thanks!
Comments
-
Carmen Gauvin-O'Donnell said:
Let's say I took the time in Logos, how would you have recommended I phrase the search, within Bible Search, I assume?
Very interesting question.
I guess the obvious is to search for "sons of Aaron" which does return the results you are looking for - but there are some caveats:
- They aren't the first results shown - the first time this search names them is in 1 Chronicles
- And it does depend on this exact phrase being present in the Bible you are using - and it might not be. (You can minimise that issue by searching for something like "sons Aaron" but that returns a much wider set of results that would be difficult to work through).
I tihnk that the experimental advanced search capability that Logos is working on - currently available on the beta web app - is probably the most likely to address these types of search queries:
0 -
Carmen Gauvin-O'Donnell said:
Hi all! I LOVE LOGOS!
I have been using it since it was, like, Libronix or something. But some help please. To this day, I still find it easier to hop onto Bing or Google for a quick question like "Aaron's son's names" than to use Logos. In this case, online the very first answer had them written right there in front of me... .02 seconds to find it or whatever.
Let's say I took the time in Logos, how would you have recommended I phrase the search, within Bible Search, I assume?
Thanks!
This is a great question, one of which I have had problems with ever since I came to Logos. So one makes a search, and as Graham points out, then one has to "hunt" for the answer through all the "stuff" that Search brings up. What good is Search if I still have to "hunt for the answer"? I have tried to say this and didn't know how. Thanks Carmen for pointing it out.
xn = Christan man=man -- Acts 11:26 "....and the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch".
Barney Fife is my hero! He only uses an abacus with 14 rows!
0 -
xnman said:
This is a great question, one of which I have had problems with ever since I came to Logos. So one makes a search, and as Graham points out, then one has to "hunt" for the answer through all the "stuff" that Search brings up. What good is Search if I still have to "hunt for the answer"?
Searching the search
Is like searching the sea
This simple answer
SB first out
For all to see
Immediately
Not is Davy Jones' locker
Interred in obscurity
0 -
Couldn't agree with you more! [Y][Y]
mm.
Carmen Gauvin-O'Donnell said:Hi all! I LOVE LOGOS!
I have been using it since it was, like, Libronix or something. But some help please. To this day, I still find it easier to hop onto Bing or Google for a quick question like "Aaron's son's names" than to use Logos. In this case, online the very first answer had them written right there in front of me... .02 seconds to find it or whatever.
Let's say I took the time in Logos, how would you have recommended I phrase the search, within Bible Search, I assume?
Thanks!
0 -
Carmen, I agree with you. I have never been a great fan of the search function within Logos.
And yet, I am finding the experimental search on the beta web app to be increasingly helpful. I searched for “Aaron's son's names” (without the quotes) in the experimental search, and found the same answers that Graham found. I also tried the same search in Bing chat. While it took a little longer than a search in the Logos beta search, Bing did come up with the correct answer.
My concern with the Bing chat search is that I have no real way of confirming the veracity of the answers without clicking on the sources listed. To me, there is no great difference between this and a traditional search, except with the traditional search, I get to choose which source I click on.
The Logos beta search gives me several choices that I can choose from separately, without trying to blend them together. It may be a minor thing, but I prefer a choice of answers that I can choose from and study, instead of a blending together of the answers for me. I find it difficult to trust an answer when I cannot trust the source of the answer, and I find it impossible to trust an answer when I do not know the source of the answer.
Above all these things, walk in love, which is the bond of perfection. - Colossians 3:14
0 -
xnman said:Carmen Gauvin-O'Donnell said:
Hi all! I LOVE LOGOS!
I have been using it since it was, like, Libronix or something. But some help please. To this day, I still find it easier to hop onto Bing or Google for a quick question like "Aaron's son's names" than to use Logos. In this case, online the very first answer had them written right there in front of me... .02 seconds to find it or whatever.
Let's say I took the time in Logos, how would you have recommended I phrase the search, within Bible Search, I assume?
Thanks!
This is a great question, one of which I have had problems with ever since I came to Logos. So one makes a search, and as Graham points out, then one has to "hunt" for the answer through all the "stuff" that Search brings up. What good is Search if I still have to "hunt for the answer"? I have tried to say this and didn't know how. Thanks Carmen for pointing it out.
Google who has built a trillion dollar business on providing relevant search. So many firms have tried to one up Google and failed. Google's search engine is the secret sauce responsible for their trillion dollar valuation. I think it is unfair to expect someone like Faithlife to dethrone Google. Use Google for what it does best and use Logos for what it does best.
I believe in a Win-Win-Win God.
0 -
I tried it in Logos but I started with the fact book & typed in sons of Aaron, it listed Numbers 3:1-2
3 These are the generations of Aaron and Moses at the time when the LORD spoke with Moses on Mount Sinai. 2 These are the names of the sons of Aaron: Nadab the firstborn, and Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar
The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), Nu 3:1–2.
0 -
1Cor10 31 said:xnman said:Carmen Gauvin-O'Donnell said:
Hi all! I LOVE LOGOS!
I have been using it since it was, like, Libronix or something. But some help please. To this day, I still find it easier to hop onto Bing or Google for a quick question like "Aaron's son's names" than to use Logos. In this case, online the very first answer had them written right there in front of me... .02 seconds to find it or whatever.
Let's say I took the time in Logos, how would you have recommended I phrase the search, within Bible Search, I assume?
Thanks!
This is a great question, one of which I have had problems with ever since I came to Logos. So one makes a search, and as Graham points out, then one has to "hunt" for the answer through all the "stuff" that Search brings up. What good is Search if I still have to "hunt for the answer"? I have tried to say this and didn't know how. Thanks Carmen for pointing it out.
Google who has built a trillion dollar business on providing relevant search. So many firms have tried to one up Google and failed. Google's search engine is the secret sauce responsible for their trillion dollar valuation. I think it is unfair to expect someone like Faithlife to dethrone Google. Use Google for what it does best and use Logos for what it does best.
Welll.... not to re-hash an old argument.... but....using what you say.... then if Logos Search produces a million possible suggestions (example only) to a question one asks.... what do you do? Spend the next year going through all the suggestions Search came up with?
If that be the case.... why waste time and money and resources on Logos Search? Just tell people to use another search and be done with it.
Nope.... I just don't buy that. [8-|]
xn = Christan man=man -- Acts 11:26 "....and the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch".
Barney Fife is my hero! He only uses an abacus with 14 rows!
0 -
May you test https://community.logos.com/forums/t/216686.aspx?PageIndex=1. You can give even feedback to the results.
Χριστὸς ἐν ὑμῖν, ἡ ἐλπὶς τῆς δόξης·
0 -
xnman said:
why waste time and money and resources on Logos Search? Just tell people to use another search and be done with it.
We use a hammer to hammer a nail in. We use a screwdriver to screw something in. In both cases, we are sending a metallic object into the wall, but we use different tools depending on the job.
Similarly, Google search is not the same as Logos search just because the word "search" is in both the phrases. You'll save time by directing your search to the appropriate tool.
I believe in a Win-Win-Win God.
0 -
Carmen Gauvin-O'Donnell said:
quick question like "Aaron's son's names"
I'd ask a simpler question. Given that the Logos search engine is designed for research not for lookups, why would you search for Aaron's son's names? You'd look it up in the Factbook under Aaron.
Or if, for some reason, you really, really wanted to use the search just to prove it could be done, you would do a media search on the genealogical charts for Aaron.
To expect the server-farm experience on a desktop application is unrealistic. However, try asking Google a question that the Logos search engine is designed to answer: Give me all the NABRE Bible references in which all 12 disciples of Jesus are present.
or try ChatGPT which is at least designed to be better suited to the task ... which bypasses everywhere they are mentioned as a group - which is exactly what I am looking for.
[quote]
Certainly. The New American Bible Revised Edition (NABRE) provides references in the New Testament where the twelve disciples (often referred to as apostles) of Jesus are mentioned. Here are the references:
- Matthew 10:1-4 - This passage introduces the twelve apostles and lists their names.
- Mark 3:13-19 - Here, Mark lists the twelve whom Jesus appointed.
- Luke 6:12-16 - Luke gives an account of the selection of the twelve apostles.
- Acts 1:13-26 - After the Ascension of Jesus, the eleven apostles gather, and Matthias is chosen to replace Judas Iscariot, thus restoring the number to twelve.
While these references directly list or mention the twelve, there are numerous instances throughout the Gospels where "the twelve" are referenced as a group without listing each name. Keep in mind that this doesn't cover every single instance where they might be implied to be present, but these references are the explicit mentions.
Hmm, any chance Logos/Verbum can give me an answer?
So, I shake my head every time this question of why the Logos search is a electronic microscope rather than a magnifying glass or a telescope is asked. It is designed to answer the type of questions the other tools can't answer. It is not designed to replace or compete with Google. It is not designed to answer the basic "factual" questions that are properly look-ups not searches.
And, yes, I am aware that the question I asked is not precisely answered by Logos. Rather I must use my human intelligence to screen the results to verify that the "all" is actually met or whether a mere mention of the disciples is assumed to mean all 12 were present.
Note: sons of Abraham is more predictable than sons of Aaron so I can readily search although it requires much more sifting through the data. Remember that one must be able to define what one is looking for:
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 -
I understand. It's just that my grandfather was comfortable sleeping on the floor and did most of the time. Me... well, I just thought there was a better way. I know there are people that love Logos Search the way it is... well... me.... I think there is a better way. And I don't feel bad for thinking there is a better way....
But we've been down this road before.... I lost then... and will probably loose now. But one day..... aah yes, one day.... [8-|]
xn = Christan man=man -- Acts 11:26 "....and the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch".
Barney Fife is my hero! He only uses an abacus with 14 rows!
0 -
xnman said:
It's just that my grandfather was comfortable sleeping on the floor and did most of the time. Me... well, I just thought there was a better way
Ah, I understand!! In hot Okanogan summers, I thought there was a better way than a bed in an upstairs bedroom. I'd sleep on the cold slate floor of the entry way and stay quite comfortable while others sweltered.
Note: my brother chose the lawn - but he had to move inside for the thunderstorms while I could sleep through them.
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 -
Carmen Gauvin-O'Donnell said:
Hi all! I LOVE LOGOS!
I have been using it since it was, like, Libronix or something. But some help please. To this day, I still find it easier to hop onto Bing or Google for a quick question like "Aaron's son's names" than to use Logos. In this case, online the very first answer had them written right there in front of me... .02 seconds to find it or whatever.
Let's say I took the time in Logos, how would you have recommended I phrase the search, within Bible Search, I assume?
Thanks!
This is exactly what I run into all the time!
0 -
Carmen Gauvin-O'Donnell said:
Let's say I took the time in Logos, how would you have recommended I phrase the search, within Bible Search, I assume?
Let me phrase my answer differently. Using the text of "War and Peace" write a search phrase to identify the sons of Count Kirill Vladimirovich Bezukhov. That is what you are asking me to do. Given the number of different ways the relationship might be expressed, directly or indirectly, it would take a very long string of possible phrasings to find them. I would essentially have to read the entire book to verify I had covered the phrasing used by a particular translator. Substitute "Bible" for "War and Peace" and "Aaron" for "Count Kirill Vladimirovich Bezukhov". Does that clarify why the search is the wrong tool? You'd have much better luck if you at least searched all resources for "sons of Aaron" OR "Aaron's sons" as even Google answers from secondary sources not the Bible.
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 -
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:Carmen Gauvin-O'Donnell said:
Let's say I took the time in Logos, how would you have recommended I phrase the search, within Bible Search, I assume?
Let me phrase my answer differently. Using the text of "War and Peace" write a search phrase to identify the sons of Count Kirill Vladimirovich Bezukhov. That is what you are asking me to do. Given the number of different ways the relationship might be expressed, directly or indirectly, it would take a very long string of possible phrasings to find them. I would essentially have to read the entire book to verify I had covered the phrasing used by a particular translator. Substitute "Bible" for "War and Peace" and "Aaron" for "Count Kirill Vladimirovich Bezukhov". Does that clarify why the search is the wrong tool? You'd have much better luck if you at least searched all resources for "sons of Aaron" OR "Aaron's sons" as even Google answers from secondary sources not the Bible.
Yes, but with Logos we've got not just the Bible to search, but an entire Library. And someone somewhere must have listed the songs of Aaron all in one sentence. That's what one is hoping to find by doing a search for the sons of Aaron. Similarly, some commentator on War and Peace might have listed the sons of Count Kirill Vladimirovich Bezukhov, and I'd expect an AI search to be able to find and identify them from a paragraph of text (understanding that "Kirill's son" and "son of Kirill" and other locutions are all synonyms). So I would expect that eventually (if not already) the beta Logos experimental search will be able to do something exactly like what Carmen wants.
I haven't read all of War and Peace, so I don't know whether this answer is correct, but here's how ChatGPT tackles the question:
Here's how it answers about the sons of Aaron:
0 -
Rosie Perera said:
we've got not just the Bible to search,
Carmen Gauvin-O'Donnell said:. . . how would you have recommended I phrase the search, within Bible Search, I assume?
True, but the OP specifically requested a Bible search. Part of my point was that if all resources were searched you would get results -- just as Google does not draw it's answer from scripture but from secondary materials.
As for War and Peace, the character relationships described in Wikipedia says
[quote]
- Count Pyotr Kirillovich ("Pierre") Bezukhov: The central character and often a voice for Tolstoy's own beliefs or struggles. Pierre is the socially awkward illegitimate son of Count Kirill Vladimirovich Bezukhov, who has fathered dozens of illegitimate sons. Educated abroad, Pierre returns to Russia as a misfit. His unexpected inheritance of a large fortune makes him socially desirable.
I chose the example because most AI chat bots would confuse major characters or characters in War and Peace for all the sons. And, no, I have no idea how many of the dozens are named in the novel.
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 -
Carmen Gauvin-O'Donnell said:
I still find it easier to hop onto Bing or Google ...
What I found interesting here (and in the entire thread) is that Logos is being compared to search engine and AI, rather than other Bible Software.
0 -
Hey all, thanks for your answers and tips! I see though that this is a discussion which is by no means over, whihc is fine.
I LOVE LOGOS!! [:D]
0 -
Carmen Gauvin-O'Donnell said:
Hey all, thanks for your answers and tips! I see though that this is a discussion which is by no means over, whihc is fine.
I LOVE LOGOS!!
I love Logos also.... and there is nothing wrong with thinking Logos can be improved! In programming, complacency is what kills programs.
xn = Christan man=man -- Acts 11:26 "....and the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch".
Barney Fife is my hero! He only uses an abacus with 14 rows!
0 -
My main critique is that they have not improved the sermon editor. I couldn’t care less about searches. I can find what I want with or without Logos. Having a full fledged editor with the ability to insert images that zoom in and out like Accordance has is more important to me for screen presentations. Logos would be up on the screen at churches and that’s free advertising for them, but no, they don’t seem to get it or care enough to implement what customers need. They would be making more money but they have gotten complacent with what they have.
DAL
0 -
DAL said:
Having a full fledged editor with the ability to insert images that zoom in and out like Accordance has is more important to me for screen presentations.
It is a mystery. I have the Sacred Art package, and all the images zoom in pretty detailed. Just looking at the method, it's similar to the zoomable maps back in 2009 (that now don't work right).
Then, there's various resources from Libby, that have zoomable imagery. That'd be from 2009 too (but different coding).
Your comment about churches is quite appropo ... especially maps and charts. Maybe Logos is concerned that too many church members might get carried away with Bible study. There is that risk (I keep my Logos hidden under a bushel, just in case).
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
Getting back to the search question, that's an issue that has frustrated me for years. The Logos search function is incredibly powerful, but I constantly find myself flipping over the Google to do quick searches related to my Bible study. It seems like I should be able to do all of my Bible-related searches in Logos, but Google is just easier for me to use for certain searches. For example when I vaguely remember a verse, but don't recall where it is, I can quickly do a (often very) rough paraphrase in Google and the verse will pop up in the first few search results.
I've finally concluded that it's unrealistic to expect specialized software like Logos to be as good at high-level, general searches as Google or Bing. I've gotten comfortable using the Logos search when I'm looking for specific information in my library, and Google for all of my "can you remind me..." searches.
0 -
EastTN said:
Getting back to the search question
OK, searches.
True, the average Logos user is going to compare the Logos search to Google. It's the next alternative usually (and effective). Then comes the apologetic, well geepers! Google has billions, years, and trillions of market value. What did you expect?!
But it's a false comparison, as if, since Logos can't be Google, well, enough said.
But Logos doesn't even do Logos well. This has been discussed before ad finitum. Its search result presentation is abysmal, even for Logos.
I did a search for 'epistula apostolorum' this morning (books, surface/headers/large-text). I had to group by 'none' so I could see the ranking. Oh wait, no, you can't do that. You have to group by book, to order by rating, but then the ordering is by book. OK, 'none'.
In the results, there was no discernable interest in headers/large-text, no interest in whether results were near each other (as in an article), and a disinterest in whether the 2 words were next to each other (the results quickly devolved into 1-word searches 'wherever'). I'd have to quote the words, and then that would mean, exact spelling.
So, let's get back to zoomable images. Google can't do that. Or maybe Factbook. Let's talk about Factbook. OK, maybe not.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
DMB said:EastTN said:
Getting back to the search question
OK, searches.
True, the average Logos user is going to compare the Logos search to Google. It's the next alternative usually (and effective). Then comes the apologetic, well geepers! Google has billions, years, and trillions of market value. What did you expect?!
But it's a false comparison, as if, since Logos can't be Google, well, enough said.
Amen to that! Why do we want Logos to spend billions of dollars to reinvent the wheel and try to replicate what Google has done? Even if Logos is successful in supplanting Google, we won't like the cost of search when it is passed on to us. I already see people complaining how a Christian organization shouldn't be charging so much. Imagine what the price would be if they have to spend billions of dollars to perfect search that no other competitor to Google has been successful in doing (think Microsoft and its useless Bing search) and then pass on those costs to us.
Shouldn't the money be spent by Logos more wisely on other priorities? Yes (in my not so humble opinion[:D])
I believe in a Win-Win-Win God.
0 -
1Cor10 31 said:
Why do we want Logos to spend billions of dollars to reinvent the wheel and try to replicate what Google has done?
Well, actually, I've always recommended them stopping by a Bellingham Middle School (Fairhaven would be good) for some help.
The sad (an overused word, I admit) part is, they're going to roll out their new AI-ish search (good), it'll be internet only (not good), and they'll forget all about their abysmal search presentation (bad). "We fixed it!!"
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
DMB said:
1Cor10 31">Why do we want Logos to spend billions of dollars to reinvent the wheel and try to replicate what Google has done?
Well, actually, I've always recommended them stopping by a Bellingham Middle School (Fairhaven would be good) for some help.
The sad (an overused word, I admit) part is, they're going to roll out their new AI-ish search (good), it'll be internet only (not good), and they'll forget all about their abysmal search presentation (bad). "We fixed it!!"
They will if the customers of Logos let them. Money talks.... I've been a complainer of Logos Search since L9. That was before Mark Barns came on the scene. Since Mark Barns came on the scene, I think customers got someone that actually listens and I believe he is trying to make Logos better. I believe He was a big reason the Logos Search was improved in L10. And I don't think he is a quitter.
xn = Christan man=man -- Acts 11:26 "....and the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch".
Barney Fife is my hero! He only uses an abacus with 14 rows!
0 -
xnman said:
And I don't think he is a quitter.
Oh, Mark does indeed push for ease of use. But that's not where the problem is.
Set your calendar for Oct 2024. And 'mark my words'. Smiling.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
I still throw things into my browser search if I am not in Logos and I frequently pull up the LSB website to check out things in the Bible directly. But both of these are almost always when I am not in Logos.
This is a holdover habit. Logos used to be like watching paint dry to start. It's not anymore. I have Logos on several devices and they start up almost instantly. I no longer have a reason not to use Logos.
Habits die very slowly. Most computer users almost always have an open browser window. It's not going away entirely. But I much prefer Logos because I now almost always want to add a note reference when I am in the Bible with any new information I get.
The mind of man is the mill of God, not to grind chaff, but wheat. Thomas Manton | Study hard, for the well is deep, and our brains are shallow. Richard Baxter
0 -
I don' think this is a deficiency with Logos, but instead a matter of asking Logos to do something it was not designed to do. Logos is, at its heart and soul, a software program that searches books (the Bible and books you have purchased through Logos). What you are asking is for synthesis, not searching. In other words, it seems that you are asking Logos to collect information and then put it into the form you're asking for, but that is not what Logos does. Logos is designed to study texts, not topics.
0 -
David McClister said:
I don' think this is a deficiency with Logos, but instead a matter of asking Logos to do something it was not designed to do.
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:David McClister said:
I don' think this is a deficiency with Logos, but instead a matter of asking Logos to do something it was not designed to do.
Reminds me of a song by Zager and Evans called "In the year 2525" .... "In the year 2525, if man is still alive, if woman can survive, they may find..." [8-|] lol.
xn = Christan man=man -- Acts 11:26 "....and the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch".
Barney Fife is my hero! He only uses an abacus with 14 rows!
0
