VMs: RE: In answer to GC on the George Boole angle

["GC" <glenclaston@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Jeff wrote:

> (snip)
> lot of avenues of investigation. Problems are often solved by
> brainstorming.
> However mad the idea seems it is thrown into the mix. This often sparks an
> idea that would otherwise not have been considered.

Entirely correct.  For instance, I would not have considered any of those
questions had you not brought up the idea, and out of those questions comes
a different line of thinking than the original.  It was not my intention to
trash your idea, rather consider it in the context of the things we know
about the VMS.  I should not have been so rude in my opening remarks, and
for that I apologize.  When I first joined this list, I got beaten up pretty
badly for some of my suggestions, but fortunately there were a few ideas
that got transferred both directions in the process, and many of us were the
better for the experience.

> I still feel that the George Boole connection has some part to play.
> Obviously not the direct connection that I have proposed. Maybe
> his work was
> the catalyst for Voynich to search out certain manuscripts. He must have
> been aware of it. As the analysis of thought and language was one of the
> themes Boole pursued, this seems to fit in well with a
> bookseller/collected
> being influenced by this sought of topic.

The simple explanation for why Voynich thought so higly of the VMS is that
it was accompanied by a letter that suggested it was a work of Roger Bacon.
Ownership of an original (and hitherto unknown) Roger Bacon manuscript would
be any bookseller's dream.


> No man is an island.

No man would want to be.  All those seagulls flying overhead.... those
beaches aren't white because of the sand.

GC

______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
unsubscribe vms-list