> Please don't begin any correspondence with the
> words "What you're saying is ..." and then
> deliberately misrepresent the import of my plainly
> stated contribution, for that is precisely an
> example of the "low road" you criticise in
The "low road" is primarily about circular arguments, poor methodology and horrible science but it's also about tactics to support ones beliefs that are unrelated to the salient facts and logic. It is largely about just interpreting everything to support beliefs instead of looking at the facts straight on.
I guess the irony here is that we all see our beliefs preferentially to reality so in a very real sense that's not stale coffee we're waking up to but the smell of feet. The low road is epitomized by things like saying the stone draggers lived on it. First just announce the low road makes one strong and knowledgeable and then claim it wrapped around the pyramid so everyone could live on it.
I'm sure I know what you're saying. You're saying that Mercer just translated the German of Sethe so he understood it less than Sethe and I must understand it less than Mercer. But I don't believe this. I'm no expert but I believe I could have solved almost any translation in a language I speak that was true to the original Ancient Language. It's not a matter of whether or not the translator understood it, it's a matter of whether or not the translator imported too many ideas from the book of the dead. Sethe didn't do this so Mercer didn't either.
People act as though the problem is Mercer but very much the problem is what the ancients actually said. What they said and they meant can be seen in Faulkner it's just a little more difficult. It's much less apparent in Allen but then Allen actually solved the term "rainbow" without knowing it! He translated the word "rainbow" as "sky arc".
How ironic that Newton translated some Syriac that contains a corollary to the third law of motion; "It ascends from ye earth to ye heaven again it desends to ye earth and receives ye force of things superior inferior.". He didn't even recognize it!!! This is describing the thing that made the rainbow/ the light scatterer of the sky/ the steps of light/ that ordered the lights above/ etc/ etc. This was a descriptionb oif using the water spraying to the sky to lift stones; "osiris tows the earth by means of balance", "tefnut make the earth high under the sky by means of her arms"...
So everyone CHOOSES to believe the PT can only be understood by Egyptologists who can't even say how the ankh came into being or what the eye of horus is. people want to believe in superstitious bumpkins because it puts us at the crown of creation but the reality is it was the shm-sceptre operator who really was at the crown of creation in the upper eye of horus and he was a criminal trying to buy his freedom trhrough working the most dangerous job.
We are on the low road virtually by definition since we are truly homo omnisciencis with unlimited ability to assume the conclusion and then see all the evidence and all the facts in terms of the assumption. Such is the human condition but it hasn't always been so.
The answers are staring us in the face if we just assume ancient people weren't stinky footed bumpkins. They lived in a different world with a different language and they didn't think like Sethe, Mercer, or any Egyptologist. An Egyptologist can't even understand an ancient thought because they can't translate even the simplest sentence.
And they can't translate even the simplest sentence because they had to contain scientific, colloquial and vulgar terms and Egyptologists understand none of the scientific terms that defined the subject of the sentence.