Central Sanctuary and Centralization of Worship
The
PhD thesis "Central Sanctuary and the Centralization of Worship
in Ancient Israel from the Settlement to the Building of Solomon's Temple:
A Historical and Theological Study of the Biblical Evidence in Its
Archaeological and Ancient Near Eastern Context" (University of
Gloucestershire 2000), by Dr Pekka Pitkänen has been published by
Gorgias Press in 2003 (second publisher's edition 2004) as Central
Sanctuary and Centralization of Worship in Ancient Israel: From the
Settlement to the Building of Solomon's Temple (Click on the
link, or on the above cover picture for book description, or see
publisher's website at www.gorgiaspress.com).
The book can also be bought for example from
Eisenbrauns
and Dove
Booksellers.
Errata on Central Sanctuary and Centralization of Worship (first edition)
Quotes from Paul
Feyerabend, Against Method (3rd edition, London: Verso, 1993)
(Please take these above all as drawing
attention to the fact that when views are proposed that are sufficiently different from those commonly held,
we move beyond "ordinary" academics.)
"John Stuart Mill has
given a fascinating account of the gradual transformation of revolutionary ideas into obstacles to thought.
When a new view is proposed, it faces a hostile audience and excellent reasons are needed to gain for it
even a moderately fair hearing. The reasons are produced, but they are often disregarded or laughed out of
court, and unhappiness is the fate of bold inventors. But new generations, being interested in new things,
become curious; they consider the reasons, pursue them further and groups of researchers initiate detailed studies.
The studies may lead to surprising successes (they also raise lots of difficulties). Now nothing succeeds like
success, even if it is success surrounded by difficulties. The theory becomes acceptable as a topic for discussion; it is
presented at meetings and large conferences. The diehards of the status quo feel an obligation to study one paper or another,
to make a few grumbling comments, and perhaps to join in its exploration. There comes then a moment when the theory
is no longer an esoteric discussion topic for advanced seminars and conferences, but enters the public domain.
There are introductory texts, popularizations; examination questions start dealing with problems to be solved in its terms.
Scientists from distant fields and philosophers, trying to show off, drop a hint here and there, and this often quite
uninformed desire to be on the right side is taken as a further sign of the importance of the theory.
Unfortunately, this increase in importance is not accompanied by better understanding; the very opposite is the case.
Problematic aspects which were originally introduced with the help of carefully constructed arguments now become basic principles;
doubtful points turn into slogans; debates with opponents become standardized and also quite unrealistic; for the
opponents, having to express themselves in terms which presuppose what they contest, seem to raise quibbles, or to misuse words.
Alternatives are still employed, but they no longer contain realistic counter-proposals; they only serve as a background
for the splendour of the new theory. Thus we do have success - but it is the success of a manoeuvre carried out in a void,
overcoming difficulties that were set up in advance for easy solution." (pp.29-30)
"...There exist numerous historical examples of the process I have just described and various authors have commented on it..." (p. 30)
Quotes from Thomas Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962)
"The transition from a paradigm in crisis to a new one from which a new tradition of normal science can emerge is far from a cumulative process, one achieved by an articulation or extension of the old paradigm. Rather it is a reconstruction of the field from new fundamentals, a reconstruction that changes some of the field's most elementary theoretical generalizations as well as many of its paradigm methods and applications." (p. 84) "...the new paradigm, or a sufficient hint to permit later articulation, emerges all at once..." (p. 89)
"As in political revolutions, so in paradigm choice - there is no standard higher than the assent of the relevant community"..."paradigm choice can never be unequivocally settled by logic and experiment alone"..."Each group uses its own paradigm to argue in that paradigm's defense." (p. 93)
<Page last updated 26/11/2007>