Started conversation Oct 20, 2002
You asked my opinion of this work in progress.
Only fools and generals judge unfinished work ..but I will accept a promotion to the rank of fool and say that so far it seems more interesting than satisfying. More promising than fulfilling. Of course, merely defining 'unfinished' as I have just done, is something any fool or general can do, so I will sally forth in earnest.
There seems to be a complete lack of background information in establishing the values of the letters. It appears to be a simple serial assignment of values from A = 1 to I = 9. Then, for unexplained reasons, it cycles back for another series of 1 thru 9 and a third time reaching only 8 for Z.
This is most arbitrary and raises several questions which are not answered in this early draft of your essay. If the series of numbers is to remain arbitrarily cut off at 9, which is coincidentally the largest single digit value, then perhaps you ought to explain that double digit numerology only compounds the folly. Or whatever other reasons there might be. Otherwise one will be left guessing or just have to assume. Not all of us are comfortable with our assumptions.
The sequence of letters A thru to Z (the Roman U/V and C/K issues notwithstanding) is a given, I take it. It would appear that you accept without question that the 'alphabet' has an established reality created entirely outside any conscious forethought of numbers, perhaps even antipathetically to quantities consciousness, but none-the-less totalling 26 (again without explanation or background). It appears you are convinced that for most people, letters are not immediately relevant to numerical values and you expect them to accept your assessement at the face values you are keen to assign.
Those lacking numerical experience, or the imagination to deal with your proposition, may find you a little too quick and keen to make your assignations without apparent rationale. I am certain that most have never assigned such values and they would want to ask you why you want to assign numerical value to letters in the first place. Is it not like speculating the milk yield of stallions or expecting flagpoles to blossom?
The specific target you have chosen for the initial exercise, "George (the second) Bush", may or may not be a wise choice, as it brings to the discussion a hint of iconoclasm for some and a known target for others. God only knows what yet-to-be-imagined values his name may yet conjure for future researchers. Perhaps an already deceased target would be less squiggly.
There is an apparent list of ready-made 'values' or 'interpretations' in the final section. These are without any named source. One wonders if they are your attributions or some classic standard set of values created at some other time by other numerologists. Since there is as yet no clarification on this matter, and certainly one must be added sooner or later or none of it will make sense or have any credibility, perhaps this would be a good time for me to re-state the maxim about fools and generals and say with sincerity that I hope you will ask me again after you have re-visited the project.
Posted Nov 11, 2002
I thought it was rather good! I bought a book hich gave the briefest of overviews to numerology, and I wanted to see if anyone out here had written about it. I think if you add more information it would become a really fascinating article. I do agree with jwf thouhg, the book I read used Princess Diana as its reference. Maybe that might help.
I do hope you finish the article, it has great potential in my eyes!
Complain about this post