Introduction

Radner, Hilary

doi:10.3366/edinburgh/9781474422888.003.0001

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A more popular allegorical interpretation is the separation of creation. This has been proposed by many scholars with only minor variations (Biddle, 2003;Houtman, 1984;Miller, 1990;Radner, 2008;Wenham, 1979;Ruwe, 1999;Sailhamer, 1992;Kamionkowski, 2018;Yoder, 2017;Tidball, 2005;Sklar, 2014;Hildenbrand, 2004;Goodfriend, 2015;Gerbrandt, 2015;Fairstein, 2017). God created things to be separate and mixture is reverting to primordial chaos thereby undoing God's work d Campbell, "Prohibited Mixtures"" of ordered creation.…”

Section: Scholarly Interpretationsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Prohibited Mixtures: Mixed Plowing and Sowing

Campbell¹

2023

Biblical Theology Bulletin: Journal of Bible and Culture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explores the prohibitions against mixed plowing and sowing (Lev 19:19; Deut 22:10). The proposed interpretation is that these laws are intended to maintain agricultural purity. They prohibit mishandling seeds and using an unclean animal, the donkey, thereby avoiding defilement of the food. This goes against the allegorical interpretations of maintaining the created order or separation from pagan nations. The argument that mixtures belong to God is also critiqued since the texts do not address field confiscation or animal breeding. The agricultural purity interpretation is developed through examination of the grammar of each passage and other agricultural purity passages in the Old Testament.

show abstract

Section: Scholarly Interpretationsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Prohibited Mixtures: Mixed Plowing and Sowing

Campbell¹

2023

Biblical Theology Bulletin: Journal of Bible and Culture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Actions (or strategies, LaValle, 1992) are a function that transforms states to consequences, that is, with each state in the world there associates a consequence (Savage, 1954). According to this definition, assume that the actor knows the state of the world, and that he/she knows the consequence resulting from each action (Radner, 1979). In addition, if for each state in the world, two actions correspond to the same consequence, then the two actions can be treated as equivalent (Savage, 1954).…”

Section: Interpretation Of Planning Behaviormentioning

confidence: 99%

An anatomy of time explicit planning behavior for urban complexity

Lai

2018

Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Planning has long been perceived as intervention in a complex spatial system that tends toward equilibrium. In this perspective, time is implicit and dynamic details do not matter. As a result, little has been said in the literature about planning behavior that takes into account time and dynamic details. Exploration into planning behavior is important in the face of complex systems that are path dependent and far from equilibrium. The purpose of the present paper is therefore to model normative planning behavior based on Savage’s ( 1954 ) utility theory, Marschak’s ( 1974 ) theory of teams, and Hopkins’s (1980) definition of plans (i.e. planning is an activity of information gathering and producing to reduce uncertainty), to interpret the planner’s behavior on plan making, implementation, and revision.[Per journal style, abstracts should not have reference citations. Therefore, can you kindly delete these reference citations ( Savage, 1954 ; Marschak, 1974 ; Hopkins, 1980 ) and rephrase the sentences as appropriate?] This model fits well the emerging perspective of the city in that urban development is non-equilibrium. We first define a simplified planning environment in which there are only one planner and one actor with three worlds: the grand world, the planner’s world, and the actor’s world, the latter two being small worlds. The notion of small world was first proposed by Savage ( 1954 ) and provides a useful way of explaining planning behavior. In the small worlds, the planner and the actor simultaneously select optimal actions among a set in order to maximize their expected utilities. Due to the mathematical property of the small world notion, planning behavior thus defined can be formulated analytically so that the planning process can be depicted in a precise, concrete language. The model proposed in the present paper is normative in nature, emphasizing on how planning behavior should take place and providing insights into how that behavior actually does come about in reality. In its current formulation, the model is only a preliminary approximation of normative planning behavior, but prompts some research questions worth pursuing, such as how multiple planners and actors make and use plans in a more complex situation and what planning procedures would be effective through computer simulations in the face of complexity.

show abstract

Introduction

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Prohibited Mixtures: Mixed Plowing and Sowing

Prohibited Mixtures: Mixed Plowing and Sowing

An anatomy of time explicit planning behavior for urban complexity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About