Mysteries :  The Official forums
For serious discussion of the controversies, approaches and enigmas surrounding the origins and development of the human species and of human civilization. (NB: for more ‘out there’ posts we point you in the direction of the ‘Paranormal & Supernatural’ Message Board). 
Welcome! Log InRegister
Merrell -

I am enjoying hearing your thoughts on this, and I agree that this discussion would be a better one once I can post my article.

And yes, I'm aware of Van Beek's arguments, but thanks for the link. The central difficulty with his view is the assumption that he can prove the non-existence of a secret tradition, to which he may not be privvy. One comparison I make is to a visitor to a college campus on Parent's Weekend coming away with no evidence of drug or alcohol use. Because the visitor is dealing with a societal group that is actively conspiring to hide the truth from him, the apparent lack of evidence is completely meaningless - it is simply indicative of a well-kept secret.

Elsdon Best describes a similar secret tradition among the Maori of New Zealand, which like Dogon cosmology centers around the 'po' as a fundamental component of matter. He says that long residence among the Maori is required before sufficient trust is gained to induce the priests to admit the existence of the tradition. So one of my questions to Van Beek is, how can he positively distinguish between a lack of evidence that comes out of deliberate obfuscation, as opposed to a lack of evidence that comes out of actual non-existence of the tradition.

My solution to the dilemma is simply to demonstrate by direct comparison that the cosmology Griaule reports is an entirely coherent form, based on the highly reputable testimony of a top scholar in regard to a tradition that Griaule had no opportunity whatsoever to influence or misconstrue. The cosmology is a coherent form, and it comes out of an esoteric tradition of precisely the kind that Griaule claims to exist among the Dogon. This constitutes direct corroboration for Griaule. It is nonsensical to say that Griaule somehow misinterpreted his Dogon informants and, in so doing, happened to accidentally document a near-exact match for another secret cosmology that I can show is an absolutely legitimate one. It is far more sensible to say that the matching form confirms Griaule's cosmological model, and so suggests that he very accurately reported he Dogon tradition.

The only real wiggle-room left is to adopt the (in my opinion) extreme view that Griaule somehow knew all the initimate details of this other tradition and deliberately and falsely presented them as if they were Dogon. But it seems far more likely to me that Van Beek interviewed a large number of Dogon tribespeople who legitimately know nothing of the secret tradition, and a smaller number of Dogon priests who deliberately lied to him - as both Griaule and Best say they are obligated by the tradition to do - to protect their secret.

As regards lack of knowledge of the Dogon language, it is true that Griaule used a translator. It is also true that his daughter ended up writing the Dogon dictionary based in large part on Griaule & Dieterlen's research.

- Laird

Options: ReplyQuote

Subject Views Written By Posted
Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 352 Duncan Kunz 29-Nov-06 13:07
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 204 Cintia Panizza 29-Nov-06 13:30
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 190 Duncan Kunz 29-Nov-06 16:32
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 194 Citizen Attorney 29-Nov-06 14:58
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 205 Duncan Kunz 29-Nov-06 16:36
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 197 Me 30-Nov-06 01:03
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 217 Duncan Kunz 30-Nov-06 05:26
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 235 Cintia Panizza 30-Nov-06 13:56
For Cintia 220 Duncan Kunz 30-Nov-06 18:11
For Duncan 193 Cintia Panizza 02-Dec-06 13:20
Read with a mirror ... previous post on GHB 196 W_C_Sally 03-Dec-06 08:23
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 230 Katherine 05-Dec-06 17:04
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 217 Cintia Panizza 30-Nov-06 17:32
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 202 Cintia Panizza 30-Nov-06 13:27
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 209 Laird Scranton 30-Nov-06 22:39
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 208 Me 30-Nov-06 23:51
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 178 Laird Scranton 01-Dec-06 00:15
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 203 mephisto 03-Dec-06 08:32
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 200 Katherine 05-Dec-06 17:27
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 240 Merrell 05-Dec-06 14:52
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 200 Ian Alex Blease 04-Dec-06 00:09
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 177 Cintia Panizza 05-Dec-06 16:36
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 159 Katherine 05-Dec-06 17:14
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 202 Cintia Panizza 05-Dec-06 18:35
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 289 Merrell 05-Dec-06 18:47
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 222 Cintia Panizza 05-Dec-06 19:33
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 161 Katherine 05-Dec-06 19:48
Transcript 184 Katherine 05-Dec-06 19:57
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 243 Merrell 05-Dec-06 20:25
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 186 Katherine 05-Dec-06 20:34
For Kat 174 Cintia Panizza 05-Dec-06 18:38
Re: For Kat 176 Katherine 05-Dec-06 18:43
Cintiapanizza 287 Katherine 05-Dec-06 19:29
For Kat and Merrel 226 Cintia Panizza 06-Dec-06 12:33
Re: For Kat and Merrel 216 Katherine 06-Dec-06 15:10
Re: For Kat and Merrel 263 Merrell 06-Dec-06 15:55
Re: For Kat and Merrel 232 Merrell 07-Dec-06 11:55
Re: For Kat and Merrel 227 Me 07-Dec-06 23:55
Re: For Kat and Merrel 611 Katherine 08-Dec-06 00:25
Re: For Kat and Merrel 220 Laird Scranton 08-Dec-06 04:21
Re: For Kat and Merrel 246 Katherine 08-Dec-06 05:07
Re: For Kat and Merrel 264 Laird Scranton 08-Dec-06 15:55
Re: For Kat and Merrel 260 Merrell 08-Dec-06 14:53
Re: For Kat and Merrel 233 Laird Scranton 08-Dec-06 16:10
Re: For Kat and Merrel 240 Merrell 08-Dec-06 18:27
Re: For Kat and Merrel 222 Laird Scranton 08-Dec-06 22:34
Re: For Kat and Merrel 223 Me 08-Dec-06 23:55
Re: For Kat and Merrel 221 Laird Scranton 09-Dec-06 00:01
Re: For Kat and Merrel 205 Laird Scranton 09-Dec-06 15:51
Re: For Kat and Merrel 311 Merrell 09-Dec-06 21:00
Re: For Kat and Merrel 197 Laird Scranton 09-Dec-06 23:58
Re: For Kat and Merrel 281 Laird Scranton 10-Dec-06 15:47
Re: For Kat and Merrel 235 Merrell 10-Dec-06 16:33
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 233 Raja 06-Dec-06 12:49
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 155 Cintia Panizza 06-Dec-06 13:03
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 213 Raja 06-Dec-06 13:13
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 234 Raja 06-Dec-06 13:19
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 210 Katherine 06-Dec-06 15:17
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 212 Raja 06-Dec-06 17:26
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 213 Katherine 06-Dec-06 17:34
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 215 Katherine 06-Dec-06 15:13
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 170 Cintia Panizza 06-Dec-06 17:11
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 217 Katherine 06-Dec-06 17:33
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 175 Raja 06-Dec-06 17:34
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 211 Katherine 06-Dec-06 17:41
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 171 Cintia Panizza 06-Dec-06 21:17
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 208 Katherine 06-Dec-06 21:25
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 190 Cintia Panizza 06-Dec-06 21:45
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 225 Katherine 06-Dec-06 22:15
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 209 Cintia Panizza 07-Dec-06 14:01
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 206 Raja 01-Dec-06 06:40
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 236 Lee McGiffen 03-Dec-06 11:38
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 212 foton 05-Dec-06 11:30
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 203 Me 06-Dec-06 00:10
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 244 Merrell 05-Dec-06 13:13
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 234 P Mac 03-Dec-06 13:50
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 224 Bobajot 03-Dec-06 23:09
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 187 Cintia Panizza 05-Dec-06 16:40
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 203 Bobajot 06-Dec-06 23:30
Re: Egypt/Maya 'correlation' 235 Cintia Panizza 07-Dec-06 14:08

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.