The EBBS Q&A section brings together questions that have already emerged in scholarly analysis, particularly at points where textual evidence, transmission history, and reception diverge. It does not aim to provide doctrinal conclusions or simplistic harmonizations; rather, it demonstrates how analytical tension can be addressed without obscuring uncertainty or conflicts within the data. If a particular question is not yet represented, the scope of the section remains open to its inclusion and further development.
Even below...
1. What is translational stability of a text?
The translational stability of a text refers to the degree to which its meaning remains unchanged after sequential translation between different languages (A → B → A). High stability indicates a low level of ambiguity and extensive semantic standardization, while low stability indicates high semantic density, idiomaticity, or strong contextual embeddedness.
2. Can back translation be a criterion of text quality?
Back translation is not a criterion of a text's quality, truthfulness, or historical accuracy, but a diagnostic tool for assessing its susceptibility to semantic reduction in translation processes. From an EBBS perspective, the result of back translation provides operational, not normative, data and requires interpretation within the broader context of textual criticism and historical-cultural analysis.
3. What does “internal inconsistency” mean in textual analysis?
Internal inconsistency refers to the presence of divergent statements, narratives, or conceptual frameworks within a corpus of texts that cannot be fully harmonized without interpretive intervention. In EBBS, such inconsistencies are treated as empirical data reflecting the diachronic, redactional, or sociocultural diversity of the tradition.
4. Does the presence of contradictions invalidate a text as a source of knowledge?
No. In evidence-based textual studies, contradictions lower the level of certainty of specific claims but do not nullify the epistemic value of the text as a whole.
5. What is meant by “self-corroboration” of a text?
Self-corroboration refers to internal consistency across multiple witnesses within a textual tradition. EBBS does not require full self-corroboration as a criterion of validity.
6. How does EBBS treat events attested in only one source?
Events preserved in a single textual witness are classified as low-certainty historical data and remain provisional.
7. Does the falsity of one element undermine the credibility of the entire text?
No. This assumption constitutes a fallacy of composition.
8. Is evidence-based methodology incompatible with faith-based reading?
No. EBBS is epistemologically neutral with respect to belief.
9. What is noise?
.jpg)
0 Comments