For the past year or so, I've mentioned that information regarding Book of Mormon authorship would be forthcoming. I offer you the following information for your consideration. This project is the result of painstaking effort on the part of Matt Jockers, Daniela M. Witten and Craig S. Criddle who some of us know as "Craig C." from 2think.org and RFM, all from Stanford University. The project was submitted for and passed peer review in the Oxford Journal of Literary and Linguistic Computing. It can be accessed via the links provided and subcription to the journal.
Follow this project, the resulting discussions which are sure to be stimulating and decide for yourself. Was the Book of Mormon delivered by divine intervention or by man himself?
Reassessing authorship of the Book of Mormon using delta and nearest shrunken centroid classification Matthew L. Jockers
Department of English, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
Daniela M. Witten
Department of Statistics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
Craig S. Criddle
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
Correspondence: Matthew L. Jockers, Department of English, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA E-mail: mjockers@stanford.edu
Abstract
Mormon prophet Joseph Smith (1805–44) claimed that more than two-dozen ancient individuals (Nephi, Mormon, Alma, etc.) living from around 2200 BC to 421 AD authored the Book of Mormon (1830), and that he translated their inscriptions into English. Later researchers who analyzed selections from the Book of Mormon concluded that differences between selections supported Smith's claim of multiple authorship and ancient origins. We offer a new approach that employs two classification techniques: ‘delta’ commonly used to determine probable authorship and ‘nearest shrunken centroid’ (NSC), a more generally applicable classifier. We use both methods to determine, on a chapter-by-chapter basis, the probability that each of seven potential authors wrote or contributed to the Book of Mormon. Five of the seven have known or alleged connections to the Book of Mormon, two do not, and were added as controls based on their thematic, linguistic, and historical similarity to the Book of Mormon. Our results indicate that likely nineteenth century contributors were Solomon Spalding, a writer of historical fantasies; Sidney Rigdon, an eloquent but perhaps unstable preacher; and Oliver Cowdery, a schoolteacher with editing experience. Our findings support the hypothesis that Rigdon was the main architect of the Book of Mormon and are consistent with historical evidence suggesting that he fabricated the book by adding theology to the unpublished writings of Spalding (then deceased).
Sounds fascinating, Jersey! I'm not going to pay for access, and it unfortunately won't be available for interlibrary loan before I graduate, but hopefully once it's actually out in the journal I will be able to find a copy.
One moment in annihilation's waste, one moment, of the well of life to taste- The stars are setting and the caravan starts for the dawn of nothing; Oh, make haste! -Omar Khayaam
If it is determined that it was multiple authors, then it was because it was written by multiple Book of Mormon prophets.
If it is determined that it was a single author, it was because Mormon abridged the plates.
Well Scottie their findings are :
Our results indicate that likely nineteenth century contributors were Solomon Spalding, a writer of historical fantasies; Sidney Rigdon, an eloquent but perhaps unstable preacher; and Oliver Cowdery, a schoolteacher with editing experience. Our findings support the hypothesis that Rigdon was the main architect of the Book of Mormon and are consistent with historical evidence suggesting that he fabricated the book by adding theology to the unpublished writings of Spalding (then deceased).
"Our results indicate that likely nineteenth century contributors were Solomon Spalding, a writer of historical fantasies; Sidney Rigdon, an eloquent but perhaps unstable preacher; and Oliver Cowdery, a schoolteacher with editing experience. Our findings support the hypothesis that Rigdon was the main architect of the Book of Mormon and are consistent with historical evidence suggesting that he fabricated the book by adding theology to the unpublished writings of Spalding (then deceased)."
They have identified the contributions of Sidney Rigdon, Oliver Cowdery and Solomon Spalding **IN** the Book of Mormon.
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
I went to access the article and it was $28. I wonder if Craig minds the article being shared or downloaded to the Net. I would imagine he's not supposed to encourage that. And it's probably illegal.
marg wrote:I went to access the article and it was $28. I wonder if Craig minds the article being shared or downloaded to the Net. I would imagine he's not supposed to encourage that. And it's probably illegal.
I should think one would need to request permission from Oxford Journals to share or download, marg. It presents a link to request permission. I provided Craig with a link to this post. If he has advice to share publicly, I'll post it here. People could also check RFM for updates or further information.
Beyond that, I think that 28$ would be well worth the cost to one who was interested in the project and certainly to provide resource for those who wish to discuss it openly and online.
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
Because I know that discussion of this project will be on-going for many several months if not years, I wanted to repost a post made by Craig Criddle on RFM back on 4-29-08 of this year, that I had transferred to this board. I cannot provide a link because RFM purges the board on a regular basis. I hope it will give the reader insight to Craig's intent regarding the project. Here it is:
"The term anti Mormon"
How many times have we heard the terms "Anti-Mormon" or "Pro-Mormon" on this or other web sites?
Some who consider themselves "pro-Mormon" (perhaps even some leaders of the Church) believe that Mormon myths must be preserved at all cost. They reason that even if the myth is false, it nevertheless provides the moral and economic foundation for Mormon society. The myth is needed for social cohesion.
Of course, underlying this argument is a profound lack of confidence in the people - it basically assumes that in the absence of myth, civil society will collapse into a vacuum of dog-eat-dog selfishness and despair.
Perpetuating the myth can thus be justified as a morally correct act. And those who reject the myth become a threat. They must be labeled as "Anti-Mormons", so that members know to avoid them, or at least to close their ears to them.
But who is the real "Anti-Mormon"? Is it the myth maker who has found ways to justify a perpetuation of lies? Or is it the myth breaker who has confidence in the inherent capacity of the people to make good decisions without a myth?
There is another way to think about this.
Who do we consider to be our "friends"? Most of us would answer that question with a list of attributes that define friendship. One attribute that would likely appear on the list is the idea that a real friend does not deceive us.
I refuse to be labeled Anti-Mormon. I am Pro-Mormon. Those who would deceive my Mormon loved ones and associates are the Anti's.
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb