John Sorenson on Mesoamerica and the Ancient Near East

[_Daniel Peterson]

According to a private communication yesterday from the University of Pennsylvania's Victor Mair that was passed on to me, Paper 195, concerning "A Complex of Ritual and Ideology Shared by Mesoamerica and the Ancient Near East," written by John Sorenson and published in December 2009, continues to be an exceptionally popular item in that university's Sino-Platonic Papers series:

http://sino-platonic.org/

Some here may find it of interest.

Go down to the list of all of the Sino-Platonic Papers and, looking at the number in the left-hand column, scroll down to #195.

[_truth dancer]

Those interested in Mormonism and Mesoamerica may also be interested in reading...

The Book of Mormon in Ancient America.

And...

Mormon Mesoamerica

:-)

~td~

[_Daniel Peterson]

There are, plainly, conflicting opinions out there, from both experts and pretended experts.

[_truth dancer]

Thankfully, Beastie has created a site filled with numerous expert opinions!


:-)

~td~

[_Joey]

By the sites own  prerequisite: "The purpose of the series is to make available to specialists and the interested public the results of research that, because of its unconventional or controversial nature, might otherwise go unpublished."

So it "only makes such controversial" topics available for specialists and the public to view.  In other words I think it's fair to say that this personal website, not endorsed nor supported by any academic institution nor organization, is not any different that Sorenson and Clark getting their articles printed at FARMS (or MI)! The only difference is that the MI won't admit up front that such articles are controversial and unconventional, so we would have to at least give Mr Mair recognition for being more honest and up front than the MI.

So I am assuming that this is the best recognition you have found for LDS scholarly works on Book of Mormon historicity and the claimed archaeology support.  If I am wrong, please provide what you believe to be the best recognition of such works other than a personal website which acknowledges up front that such works are not accepted by the profession.

And, since getting printed on Mair's site, are you aware of any professional or academic interest generated for this scholarship that has historically to date, again your words, been ignored?

If this is the best recognition of  LDS scholarship in this area. I have no doubt you would agree it is still a long way from being convincing and accepted by academic and professional standards.

[_Daniel Peterson]

By the sites own  prerequisite [sic]: "The purpose of the series is to make available to specialists and the interested public the results of research that, because of its unconventional or controversial nature, might otherwise go unpublished."

So it "only makes such controversial" topics available for specialists and the public to view.  In other words I think it's fair to say that this personal website, not endorsed nor supported by any academic institution nor organization, is not any different that Sorenson and Clark getting their articles printed at FARMS (or MI)!

????

The only difference is that the MI won't admit up front that such articles are controversial and unconventional, so we would have to at least give Mr Mair recognition for being more honest and up front than the MI.

Of course they're controversial and unconventional.

Who would ever deny that?

So I am assuming that this is the best recognition you have found for LDS scholarly works on Book of Mormon historicity and the claimed archaeology support.

On what basis do you assume that?

I've said no such thing.

If I am wrong, please provide what you believe to be the best recognition of such works other than a personal website which acknowledges up front that such works are not accepted by the profession.

And, since getting printed on Mair's site, are you aware of any professional or academic interest generated for this scholarship that has historically to date, again your words, been ignored?

If this is the best recognition of  LDS scholarship in this area. I have no doubt you would agree it is still a long way from being convincing and accepted by academic and professional standards.

Incidentally, you may need to revise your knee-jerk advance-dismissal technique just a little bit for this item and for this item, as well as these items:

John L. Sorenson. "The Significance of an Apparent Relationship between the Ancient Near East and Mesoamerica." In Man across the Sea: Problems of Pre-Columbian Contacts, edited by C. L. Riley, J. C. Kelley, C. W. Pennington, and R. L. Rands, 219—41. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1971.

John L. Sorenson. "A Reconsideration of Early Metal in Mesoamerica." Katunob 9 (March 1976): 1—18.

John L. Sorenson and Carl L. Johannessen. "Biological Evidence for Pre-Columbian Transoceanic Voyages." In Contact and Exchange in the Ancient World, edited by Victor H. Mair, 238—97. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 2006.

Your technique requires not only shameless dogmatism and determined ignorance but also a measure, at least, of comic agility in order for it to be entirely successful.

In the meantime, my wife and I are going out with friends tonight, so I won't be around to see your next dismissal-without-reading-it until at least tomorrow.

[_truth dancer]

"The purpose of the series is to make available to specialists and the interested public the results of research that, because of its unconventional or controversial nature, might otherwise go unpublished."

Both..
The Book of Mormon in Ancient Americaand,Mormon Mesoamerica share information from experts, information that is accepted, peer reviewed, and considered authoritative by professioinals in the field.

Excellent resources for those who want to read and understand accepted expert scholarship on the topic of Mesoamerica and Mormonism.

~td~

[_Daniel Peterson]

Do you, perhaps, imagine that Professor Sorenson's work doesn't include information from experts? Information that is accepted, peer reviewed, and considered authoritative by professionals in the field?

I take it, thus, that you, too, are a member of Joey's I-Won't-Read-It Club?

Do you imagine that the University of Texas Press and the University of Hawai‘i Press and Katunob aren't peer-reviewed operations in their own right?

Oh well. I'm simply here to announce interesting things. Those who want to look at them are free to do so. Those who don't want to look at them are free to ignore them. No skin off my nose.

Happy New Year!

Good night.

[_Calculus Crusader]

There are, plainly, conflicting opinions out there, from both experts and pretended experts.

I hope the underlined portion is not directed at beastie, as she does not claim to possess a formal education in Mesoamerican civilization. (Of course, a formal education in Mesoamerican civilization is not required to realize or argue that the Book of Mormon is a work of fiction.)

[_Dr. Shades]

. . . continues to be an exceptionally popular item in that university's Sino-Platonic Papers series:

http://sino-platonic.org/

"Sino-Platonic?"

What does China have to do with Plato?