Shannon and Interpretation

For this morning’s entry, I’ll just flag up (again, sorry) my article in Horizons in Biblical Theology, wherein I make the connection that links Claude Shannon’s information theory (a very good thing), Roman Jakobson’s redeployment of it (a questionable thing), and the way it has become an ossified set piece in the conventional discourse about the singularity and discoverability of meaning (a very bad thing). As Shannon himself says, ‘Our fellow scientists in many different fields, attracted by the fanfare and by the new avenues opened to scientific analysis, are using these ideas in their own problems. Applications are being made to biology, psychology, linguistics, fundamental physics, economics, the theory of organization, and many others…. The subject of information theory has certainly been sold, if not oversold.’ Don’t buy it!

Monolingual Judges

Friday I noted on Twitter that in Louis Ginzberg’s Legends of the Jews (have I mentioned here before how much I relish that compendium?) volume 3, on the digitised version of which I’m now working, Jethro instructs Moses to delegate (recapitulating the scene from Exodus 18). Moses wants nominations from the floor, but reserves to himself the prerogative to appoint judges who will relieve the burden of his governance.

Moses wants to make sure the people nominate the right sort of candidate, not motivated by kinship or wealth, appearance or atheticism. He further mentions another criterion, one that’s less obviously pertinent:

“Heretofore,” [Moses] said, “you belonged to yourselves, but from now you belong to the people; for you judge between every man, and his brother and his neighbor. If ye are to appoint judges, do so without respect of persons. Do not say, ‘I will appoint that man because he is a handsome man or a strong man, because he is my kinsman, or because he is a linguist.” — Legends of the Jews, Vol. 3 From the Exodus to the Death of Moses, p. 71.

Ginzberg weaves this part of Legends from Sifrei Devarim 17 (by the way, a big hat tip to Sefaria.org, the kind of site I’ve been advocating for a long time online). Sefaria’s translation of the passage reads

(Devarim 1:17) “Do not play favorites in judgment”: This is (addressed to) one who is appointed to seat judges. Lest you say: That man is comely; I will make him a judge — that man is strong; I will make him a judge — that man is my kinsman; I will make him a judge — that man lent me money; I will make him a judge — that man is multilingual; I will make him a judge — so that (in his innocence) he exonerates the guilty and incriminates the innocent — not because he is wicked, but because he does not know (the law), Scripture terms (appointing him as a judge) as “playing favorites in judgment.”

So the disqualifying criterion manifestly involves facility in languages, but it’s not quite clear why. Perhaps because the multilingual judge might use their facility in languages that one of the complainants doesn’t know, to communicate secretly with somebody else? Ordinarily, one might think it convenient and commendable for a judge to know all the languages they might encounter in their practice, but Moses evidently saw things differently.

Trappist Origins

Over the holiday I took a lead from Fr Robin’s recommendation and read the Abbé Henri Huvelin’s Some Spiritual Guides of the Seventeenth Century; it was so captivating that I then cleaned it up (editorially — no need of censorship) and posted my fresh edition to the Internet Archive.

You can download it from here, and you can find Abbé Huvelin’s graduation picture at the École Normale from the Archive as well. Some Spiritual Guides narrates the backstories of its subjects, including the startling rumours about theb Abbé de Rancé and his encounter with Madame de Montbazon’s severed head.