Michael Perelman wrote:
> I recall reading two translations of a Chinese poem. One by Arthur
> Whately and one by Joseph Needham. I don't think that one person out of
> a hundred would recognize that they came from the same source.
[I assume Whateley is a misprint for Waley?] You should see the translations of the "Confucian Odes" by Pound!! I've read Plato's *Republic* in a number of different translations and they vary quite wildly also. So if I'm citing the work on some fine point I'm apt to specifiy "Cornford's Plato" or "Grube's Plato." But on a cardinal number I think I can trust my translation of Herodotus.
> The
> translation of Primitive Accumulation is very different from what Marx
> (Adam Smith) wrote -- although I think that the mistranslation adds to
> the subject.
I would like to hear more on this.
>
> I think that the whole idea of the scientific method is that a person
> has to be able draw upon an existing body of knowledge on which s/he
> feels that s/he can rely.
This gets across one of the core ideas of my original post. We simply have to rely on authority (authors) for much of our information. For knowledge to be even remotely accumulative (progressive) this is necessary.
> Thus, from my prior reading I have the
> feeling that I can prioritize my future reading, ignoring some and
> seeking others.
I just stated this in crude form over on the marxism list and got flamed for it. I was a bit extravagant there. But obviously it is a physical impossibility to read everything one is supposed to read.
>
> As an undergraduate, I always tried to look for what my professors all
> rejected -- Nietzsche (who they said cause Nazism, Marx --- [Carrol,
> this was at your Univ. of Michigan]. It proved to be a useful rule of
> thumb.
I was there in the late '50s. I'm fairly immune to nostalgia -- but I miss the wooden tables and wooden captain's chairs in the Men's Union cafeteria. One professor there provided a sort of explanation of my later corruption. He said Hobbes was spoiled by reading Euclid at age 40. One should read Euclid, he said, while young and get over it. I first read Lenin at 40.
Carrol