Recent post reported on the small but significant linkage of 10 words to known languages, in the seemingly undecipherable, arcane, cryptic document.. Refer: puzzle solved?
Though not as credible, there have been other claims in recent years of "breakthroughs", including comparison to Mexican origins of some plants; and a cypher gizmo that can create similar language code in complete gibberish. The Manuscript has been studied extensively from many viewpoints, and we aren't even able to say whether its code, unknown language, gibberish, or what.
Over the years it had been determined that the manuscript, though unreadable, followed numerous rules of linguistics, languages, etc. but has never been deciphered. The manuscript is dated to be over 500 yrs old at least, and has been scrutinized by nearly every scientific paradigm possible: ethnologists, botanists, chemists, physiologists, lexicographers, cryptographers, zoologists, magicians, ink people, paper people, rocket scientists, and even several women. The results have been puny little quips like the ones noted above with nothing definite.
Now let's remind ourselves of the aphorism that "we cannot solve our problems using the same thinking that created them"; and another "this is where our best thinking has gotten us, alas."
So I am suggesting using different thinkers, different disciplines,new ways of looking at it. Such as pedagogy for example. At a recent pedagogical conference/spring break these noble folks identified some common trends, patterns, etc that could make up a science if put all together. Universal constants, so to speak. For e.g. If you assign an undergrad a 5 page paper, you will see double and triple spacing, narrow margins, large fonts, and repetition like you wouldn't believe so the word count is actually about 150 words.. If you try to outsmart them by assigning a minimum word count, say a 500 word paper, you will be able to take a trip through thesaurus land, punctuation land, redundancies, and run-on sentences, which are sentences that add more words that basically repeat the same thing as the first part of the sentence stated, thus running on unnecessarily. Nice one. Now I think that we ought to let the pedagogues have a crack at Voynich. They are all aware that many college undergrads, when asked to write a lengthy paper or an answer to a difficult essay question will devolve after 150 words into a rhythmic, hypnotic, fanciful, bizarre, and unintelligible load of crap as the heavens have ever seen, sometimes even adding charts, drawings, etc that have nothing to do with the question. It has been found that many of these papers have similarities to the Voynich document. Maybe there's something there that can help us decipher it.
Note: This essay is based on actual events and stuff. The Voynich Manuscript is fascinating, if for no other reason than the interest and efforts of some of our best minds in figuring it out.
Though not as credible, there have been other claims in recent years of "breakthroughs", including comparison to Mexican origins of some plants; and a cypher gizmo that can create similar language code in complete gibberish. The Manuscript has been studied extensively from many viewpoints, and we aren't even able to say whether its code, unknown language, gibberish, or what.
Over the years it had been determined that the manuscript, though unreadable, followed numerous rules of linguistics, languages, etc. but has never been deciphered. The manuscript is dated to be over 500 yrs old at least, and has been scrutinized by nearly every scientific paradigm possible: ethnologists, botanists, chemists, physiologists, lexicographers, cryptographers, zoologists, magicians, ink people, paper people, rocket scientists, and even several women. The results have been puny little quips like the ones noted above with nothing definite.
Now let's remind ourselves of the aphorism that "we cannot solve our problems using the same thinking that created them"; and another "this is where our best thinking has gotten us, alas."
So I am suggesting using different thinkers, different disciplines,new ways of looking at it. Such as pedagogy for example. At a recent pedagogical conference/spring break these noble folks identified some common trends, patterns, etc that could make up a science if put all together. Universal constants, so to speak. For e.g. If you assign an undergrad a 5 page paper, you will see double and triple spacing, narrow margins, large fonts, and repetition like you wouldn't believe so the word count is actually about 150 words.. If you try to outsmart them by assigning a minimum word count, say a 500 word paper, you will be able to take a trip through thesaurus land, punctuation land, redundancies, and run-on sentences, which are sentences that add more words that basically repeat the same thing as the first part of the sentence stated, thus running on unnecessarily. Nice one. Now I think that we ought to let the pedagogues have a crack at Voynich. They are all aware that many college undergrads, when asked to write a lengthy paper or an answer to a difficult essay question will devolve after 150 words into a rhythmic, hypnotic, fanciful, bizarre, and unintelligible load of crap as the heavens have ever seen, sometimes even adding charts, drawings, etc that have nothing to do with the question. It has been found that many of these papers have similarities to the Voynich document. Maybe there's something there that can help us decipher it.
Note: This essay is based on actual events and stuff. The Voynich Manuscript is fascinating, if for no other reason than the interest and efforts of some of our best minds in figuring it out.
hysterical
ReplyDeleteI'll bet the paper was submitted as a hs class assignment at the school of bright promise
ReplyDelete