Thread: An experiment
View Single Post
  #2  
Old 03-06-2016, 10:07 AM
spyglass spyglass is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: gravesend,kent
Posts: 599
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre View Post
Hi,

Why hasnīt the Goulston Street Graffiti been explained?

My hypothesis is that it can be explained if you think outside the box, that is, if you use different thinking. So I would like to invite you to an experiment by posing two questions.

The general understanding of the text

"The Juwes are the men that will not be blamed for nothing"

is that it had to do with jews.

This understanding is created already in 1888. So that understanding is setting the frame for our understanding. And since then ripperologists have been trying to explain a content about jews.

But there has never been a real understanding of the text, since no one has managed to explain it. That it why we can not understand it today.

Another type of understanding of the text, also connected to the word "juwes", is that the person who wrote it - that is, the killer (if we do not hypothesize that the killer wrote it, there is no need for analysing the text) -
could not spell.

This idea does not fit with the rest of the text, since it is correctly spelled.

Those who have been trying to understand the word as being wrongly spelled, have also been trying to explain that. In this case there has been explanations saying that the killer must have come from a lower class. But the writing on the wall was in a schoolboys good hand.

So that does not fit with the idea of the text being written by an uneducated man or by someone from a lower class.

To summarize: The idea of the word "juwes" as referring to jews is a problem.

Another problem is the double negative "not be blamed for nothing".

But this construction must be seen as a secondary problem, since we do not have an explanation that generates understanding for the key word "juwes".

So as long as we do not understand that word, we will absolutely not be able to understand the double negative. Therefore, an hypothesis should be that if we manage to understand the "juwes", we will also understand the double negative.

As I said, I would like to invite you to an experiment.

Many have been used to thinking from inside of the box, and understand the writing from a perspective of the frame set by earlier generations and from people from 1888, from the police etc.

I think we need to get rid of the box.

Letīs start with two interesting questions and please try to answer the first and then the second:

1. What would happen if we forget about the interpretation of this word as having anything to do with jews?

2. What would happen if one uses a dictionary to try and understand the word?

As you can see, I am not asking about the meaning of the text but I am asking you about a method for thinking about the meaning of the text.


Kind regards, Pierre
Hi Pierre,
Of course there is the problem first of what was actually written, and which version one would prefer.


Regards
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote