Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 84 (8914 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-19-2019 3:49 AM
24 online now:
Tangle (1 member, 23 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Post Volume:
Total: 854,110 Year: 9,146/19,786 Month: 1,568/2,119 Week: 328/576 Day: 3/128 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev12
3
4Next
Author Topic:   A Discussion of the Rationalization of Slavery
Coyote
Member (Idle past 271 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(1)
Message 31 of 50 (546314)
02-09-2010 10:03 PM


One small point
One small point:

In human history, slavery is not necessarily related to race or racism.

Quite a number of Native American groups took slaves. It was sufficient that they were members of a different culture/group (us vs. them). The bible mentions and condones slavery.

For most of human history, the folks next door were the ones battled with, and enslaved if they lost those battles. Those folks would have been of the same racial group as the attackers. They were of a different cultural group.

It wasn't until Europeans started running around the world in boats that different races came into serious contact with one another. Slavery was well-established long before then.

Europeans were able to take slavery to wholesale levels, but they didn't invent it.


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by Hyroglyphx, posted 02-09-2010 10:28 PM Coyote has not yet responded
 Message 33 by ZenMonkey, posted 02-10-2010 3:32 AM Coyote has not yet responded

  
Hyroglyphx
Member
Posts: 5663
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006


Message 32 of 50 (546320)
02-09-2010 10:28 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by Coyote
02-09-2010 10:03 PM


Re: One small point
Your small point just so happens to be 100% correct.


"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." --John Adams
This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Coyote, posted 02-09-2010 10:03 PM Coyote has not yet responded

    
ZenMonkey
Member (Idle past 2676 days)
Posts: 428
From: Portland, OR USA
Joined: 09-25-2009


Message 33 of 50 (546328)
02-10-2010 3:32 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by Coyote
02-09-2010 10:03 PM


Re: One small point
As I understand it, landowners in 17th century North and South America and in the assorted islands initially adopted the wholesale enslavement of blacks out of economic motives. Life was becoming less dangerous for their indentured servants, who were now living long enough to complete their contracts and go out on their own. Faced with a labor shortage, they began importing human beings from Africa as slaves. There was already an established slave trade in Africa, where they often enslaved prisoners of war and the like, as did almost all cultures at one point or another. Using Africans meant that you could always tell if an individual was a slave, a much harder proposition than if you had an enslaved Scot or Italian on your plantation. Black skin = somebody's property, no questions needed. Most of the talk of the inferiority of certain racial groups - however much they were later fervently accepted - were initially ad hoc justifications for a primarily economic arrangement.


I have no time for lies and fantasy, and neither should you. Enjoy or die.
-John Lydon
This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Coyote, posted 02-09-2010 10:03 PM Coyote has not yet responded

  
DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 1266 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 34 of 50 (546334)
02-10-2010 6:24 AM
Reply to: Message 30 by Hyroglyphx
02-09-2010 9:29 PM


Re: There are no innocents, only degrees of guilt.
I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying it happened. I also am saying that early slavery and the social mores that drove them were of such a different time that to compare them by today's standards and ethos of today's times won't explain their reasoning.

I am not trying to compare these behaviors to today, just the justification for there being enacted in the first place. We should always strive to learn from the past so we don't repeat it.

You don't honestly believe they enslaved Africans because they were black do you? Please tell me advantage their "blackness" made?

I think we are talking around each other. They justified their abhorrant behavior by using there blackness i.e. there racial/cultural differences. They didn't blink about treating these people badly BECAUSE they thought they were inferior and sub-human.

They enslaved them because they were easy targets of opportunity.

So why didn't they enslave other people from there own cultures or those near-by? Why travel clear around the world to enslave people from a foreign culture that they litteraly knew nothing about?

Race/cultural/religious differences were a motivational factor whether you choose to accept that or not.

"Racism" as we know it today is a later invention as a result of different cultures clashing

No, racism, whether they called it that or not existed since prehistory.

Websters writes:

Racism: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

Are you saying that until modern history people did not believe that some races/cultures/ethnicities (usually there own) were superior to other races/cultures/ethnicities?

Yes, of course. Of this mindset there is little doubt and ample evidence to support it. This is, however, vastly different than enslaving people because of racism.

The choose to enslave these people because
a. They believed other races/ethnicities/cultures were inferior to theirs
b. And because they believed this they felt justified in taking advantage of these other cultures

In other words we are both right. Racism did play a part as well as the act of taking advantage of weaker cultures.

Why did the English have it out for the Scots and Irish? Was it because of racism?

Like I said before the term 'race' had different conotations then the scientific term we use today. Racism really encompassed discrimination against people of other races/cultures/ethnicities (there are such things as sub-races too). The Scots and Irish at that time were definately different in culture/ethnicity/religion/etc then the Anglo-Saxons and the Normans and thus yes this could be construed as racist/cultural-centric behavior.

They're all caucasian, bearing in mind that modern Italians and ancient Romans are very dissimilar due to a later influx of cultures like the Moors.

The term caucasian did not come about until the mid to later 1800s to describe people of European ancestry. Even the term 'race' did not originate until the 15th and 16th centuries. Europeans sqwabbled amongst themselves as to which ethnicity/culture/nation-state were the most superior. If they did this amongst there own 'race' what do you think they thought of people of vastly different hues of skin/ethnicities/cultures?

BTW, the Romans and Greeks very much were considered different 'races' even other 'caucasian' ethnicities at the time as inferior and considered them 'barbarians'. Even the Romans considered the Greeks as inferior and subservient even though they borrowed much of there culture from them.

No one is denying that racism has existed in one form or another since the whole thing began, but it certainly was not a lasting motivation for slavery

You are fooling yourself. It was the DRIVING FORCE for slavery during colonial times. It gave them the moral imperative to commit this attrocity.

As it is, MOST slavery has occurred within their own races for the simple fact of proximity.

Again then why did the English, Dutch, and other colonial powers sail halfway around the world to commit this deed. Why didn't they enslave each other?

Of those that took to the sea in search of slaves certainly developed biases based on cultural differences which were recognized because of physical differences. That much is bloody obvious, but that is a later invention not a primal motivation for slavery.

This is a complex subject however again the "us vs them" and "kill or be killed" survival mentality is really what drove slavery to begin in the first place. Racism practices and thoughts were part and parcel with this process and evolved as cultures/ethnicities/races evolved.

The exploitation of people as means of cheap labor is obviously the prime reason, but historians often draw a false parallel from slavery to racism.

How is this a false parallel? In fact they are one in the same whether people realized it or not or called it racism or not. Slavery in fact is an active form of racism. In other words slavery is racism in action. Again look at the definition of racism.


“One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we've been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We're no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It is simply too painful to acknowledge -- even to ourselves -- that we've been so credulous.” - Carl Sagan, The Fine Art of Baloney Detection

"You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe." - Carl Sagan

"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World


This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Hyroglyphx, posted 02-09-2010 9:29 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 2077 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 35 of 50 (546340)
02-10-2010 9:58 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by Taz
02-09-2010 1:23 AM


Just imagine what kind of fucked up country we'd be living in if people like buz are in charge.

And you just got back from which planet?


If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be. --Thomas Jefferson
This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Taz, posted 02-09-2010 1:23 AM Taz has not yet responded

  
DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 1266 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 36 of 50 (546769)
02-13-2010 6:26 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by Hyroglyphx
02-09-2010 1:33 PM


Right, but you have identified the problem; by today's standards. Social mores evolve over time so that what is reprehensible to us today was normal in the past.

I am not disputing this in anyway. What I am disputing is Buzz's justification that slavery was ok because the inflicted party:

a. inflicted slavery on other members of the same cultures (which is true of just about every race/ethnicity/culture on earth at one or more points in there history, but still does not make it justifiable)
b. they were endeared to there masters (yes Buzz actually said this)
c. benefited from slavery (???)

None of these excuses are justifiable much less credible. That is my only point here.

I am not sure why you keep belabaring the point that our mores/standards have changed through history. I have taken a good deal of history, humanities, psychology and sociology classes and believe me, I understand what you are getting at and whole heartedly agree.

Well, I would agree that it is not right, but at the same time we do have to look at history in its context. Like it or not, that was just the way things were.

I am not stupid. I understand that is the way things were.

The problem I have is with people, who live at a time in which they are granted the most individual freedoms to date, can justify people in history who removed the individual freedoms of others and exhibited some of the most attrocious and inhumane acts on other human aka slavery/torture/rape/etc. This is what I cannot and will not accept no matter what the justification. Understanding history and justifying/nullifying/condoning past behavior are two different things.

But there were a few who recognized the sheer hypocrisy of freedom and yet having slaves. People like Thomas Jefferson advocated the owning of slaves, while John Adams never once owned a slave and spoke out against it.

Why is it so hard to accept that people like Thomas Jefferson and every other larger-than-life person in history were not saints? Why do we either deify everyone we like and demonize everyone we don't like in history? Thomas Jefferson was a great politician and humitarian. But just like everyone else, he had his vises as well as his virtues. He was wrong about owning slaves. He was a man with a conflicted conscience I am sure. It is hard to break out of a pattern/life style even if you know it to be wrong.


“One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we've been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We're no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It is simply too painful to acknowledge -- even to ourselves -- that we've been so credulous.” - Carl Sagan, The Fine Art of Baloney Detection

"You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe." - Carl Sagan

"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World


This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Hyroglyphx, posted 02-09-2010 1:33 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by anglagard, posted 02-13-2010 7:11 PM DevilsAdvocate has not yet responded

  
anglagard
Member
Posts: 2189
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 37 of 50 (546773)
02-13-2010 7:11 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by DevilsAdvocate
02-13-2010 6:26 PM


Buzsaw's Black Box
DevilsAdvocate writes:

I am not disputing this in anyway. What I am disputing is Buzz's justification that slavery was ok because the inflicted party:

a. inflicted slavery on other members of the same cultures (which is true of just about every race/ethnicity/culture on earth at one or more points in there history, but still does not make it justifiable)
b. they were endeared to there masters (yes Buzz actually said this)
c. benefited from slavery (???)

Makes one wonder if Buz or anyone of similar proclivities has the normal amount of empathy present in the average human being.

Buz may need some help in imagining a historic scenario, such as if he was captured by the Turks during the Barbary pirate days. No problem, I'm here to help.

Now Buz would have to admit the Turks had the right to enslave him because:

1) They did it to their 'own' people, particularly war captives, and showing they were not particularly racist against more northerly Europeans, often enslaved them as well.
2) Such enslavement may have endeared Buz to his Ottoman masters, after all they were, along with the Chinese, the most educated and sophisticated cultures on the planet until those evil European enlightenment figures institutionalized such decadent Western practices as democracy and science.
3) The benefits from such slavery would naturally extend to cultural, medical, and mathematical sophistication along with a greater degree of tolerance for other peoples who often found themselves in the same boat so to speak. Who knows, the captured ancestral Buz could mean the current Buz would be singing the praises of Allah at this moment. In fact I believe based upon his posts in support of fundamentalism, he would fit right in and perhaps with some luck and grit even become the Iranian Imam of his dreams.

Then again he could just wind up being a fish in a barrel.

Edited by anglagard, : replaced white with more northerly Europeans for sake of accuracy.


The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
— Salman Rushdie

This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen


This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 02-13-2010 6:26 PM DevilsAdvocate has not yet responded

    
onifre
Member (Idle past 1116 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 38 of 50 (546992)
02-15-2010 4:19 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by DevilsAdvocate
02-09-2010 6:21 PM


The Crick opinon...
Many Europeans did look at black people (and other 'foreign' cultures) as inferior because they were spured by superstition, social norms and religious belief. It wasn't that long ago (and some still do) that many fundamental Christians believed that Africans were inferior because of the Curse of Ham as depicted in Genesis 9:20-27.

Silly superstitions aside, the opinion of genetic inferiority actually has (one very famous) scientific supporter.

source

quote:
Watson, who won the 1962 Nobel prize for his part in discovering the structure of DNA, provoked a storm of criticism after his comments were published in the Sunday Times.

The eminent biologist told the British newspaper he was "inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa" because "all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours -- whereas all the testing says not really."


Furthermore:

quote:
In the newspaper interview, he said there was no reason to think that races which had grown up in separate geographical locations should have evolved identically. He went on to say that although he hoped everyone was equal, "people who have to deal with black employees find this not true".

So even when religious superstitions are ignored, there are still other arguments to support genetic inferiority.

---------------------------------

My only opinion on slavery, which I must admit that slavery is one of those topic that I could care less about, is that its human nature to control those who can't fight back - for whatever reason.

We are all slaves to something or someone, blacks were slaves to whites at a point in history, and?

Is it justified? Sure. I'm stronger and better armed, you do as I say. Period. Is it right or wrong? Who knows, who cares? Fight back or submit to the will of the strong, or, more intelligent. But my opinion is of no relevance to this thread so please ignore it.

- Oni


This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 02-09-2010 6:21 PM DevilsAdvocate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 02-15-2010 6:27 PM onifre has not yet responded
 Message 40 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 02-15-2010 6:41 PM onifre has responded
 Message 44 by anglagard, posted 02-16-2010 3:19 AM onifre has responded

    
DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 1266 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 39 of 50 (547007)
02-15-2010 6:27 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by onifre
02-15-2010 4:19 PM


Re: The Crick opinon...
Onifre writes:

Silly superstitions aside, the opinion of genetic inferiority actually has (one very famous) scientific supporter.

A Noble Laureate and famous molecular biologist does not a moral and decent person make.

However, realize that he is the product of his times. My grandfather espoused many of the same views and he was a Christian minister of over 50 years and rather decent human being.

I am sure if we could jump into a time machine and listen to conversations from citizens of the 22nd century and beyond they would say how barbaric and inhumane even the most progressive and liberal of us in the 21st century were. At least I would hope this would be the case as we continue to advocate and progress the personal freedoms and equality of all people irregardless of race, culture, religion, gender or creed.

I can only defer to Martin Luther King's famous speach:

Martin Luther King, Jr. writes:

Let us not wallow in the valley of despair, I say to you today, my friends.

And so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.

I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal."

I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia, the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.

I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

I have a dream today!

I have a dream that one day, down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of "interposition" and "nullification" -- one day right there in Alabama little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.

I have a dream today!

I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, and every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight; "and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed and all flesh shall see it together."

This is our hope, and this is the faith that I go back to the South with.

With this faith, we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith, we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith, we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day.

And this will be the day -- this will be the day when all of God's children will be able to sing with new meaning:

My country 'tis of thee, sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing.

Land where my fathers died, land of the Pilgrim's pride,

From every mountainside, let freedom ring!

And if America is to be a great nation, this must become true.


“One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we've been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We're no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It is simply too painful to acknowledge -- even to ourselves -- that we've been so credulous.” - Carl Sagan, The Fine Art of Baloney Detection

"You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe." - Carl Sagan

"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World


This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by onifre, posted 02-15-2010 4:19 PM onifre has not yet responded

  
DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 1266 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 40 of 50 (547010)
02-15-2010 6:41 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by onifre
02-15-2010 4:19 PM


Re: All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.
My only opinion on slavery, which I must admit that slavery is one of those topic that I could care less about, is that its human nature to control those who can't fight back - for whatever reason.

We are all slaves to something or someone, blacks were slaves to whites at a point in history, and?

Is it justified? Sure. I'm stronger and better armed, you do as I say. Period. Is it right or wrong? Who knows, who cares?

Who cares? That is the same mindset many Europeans and Americans had when Jews were being erradicated by the Nazi Germans.

Who cares? I fucking care and so should everyone who espouses to be an advocate for international human rights.

Who cares? Slavery is not just a relic of the past. It exists and is a thriving industry in today's modern world in the forms of sexual exploitation, prostitution, child pornography and human trafficing of tens of millions of men, women and children and a world market in the hundreds of billions of dollars.

Really Oni? Do you really think slavery is an archaic event in history? No, it is still alive and kicking.

Fight back or submit to the will of the strong, or, more intelligent. But my opinion is of no relevance to this thread so please ignore it.

Actually it is very relavent, because if we don't stand up for this attrocious and abhorant behavior. Who will?

Edmund Burke writes:

All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.

Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.


“One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we've been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We're no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It is simply too painful to acknowledge -- even to ourselves -- that we've been so credulous.” - Carl Sagan, The Fine Art of Baloney Detection

"You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe." - Carl Sagan

"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World


This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by onifre, posted 02-15-2010 4:19 PM onifre has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by onifre, posted 02-15-2010 10:45 PM DevilsAdvocate has responded

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 1116 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 41 of 50 (547043)
02-15-2010 10:45 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by DevilsAdvocate
02-15-2010 6:41 PM


Re: All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.
Really Oni? Do you really think slavery is an archaic event in history? No, it is still alive and kicking.

Easy DA, get off the soup box. I didn't mean 'who cares' as in if it were happening now who cares.

Slavery is horrible, all forms of it, whether aggressive or under the radar. I hate, despise, find it abhorent to enslave any thing, so I fully agree with you. But again, in many cases I like to call out certain hypocrisies and note that we humans advocate many forms of slavery, all be it under other labels.

Like a circus for instance. But we look the other way, and even enjoy the entertainment aspect of it. And I'm not saying that some circus' don't take good proper care of the animals, but it would be the same as saying some slave owners took good proper care of their slaves. But here again I don't care because it's human nature to do this; like I said before: to control and use those who are weaker or less intelligent.

We do it with animals in labs as well.

Actually it is very relavent, because if we don't stand up for this attrocious and abhorant behavior. Who will?

I agree, we should fight back, but for all species, not just one particular organism. What's the sense of calling it moral if it's selective?

Also, it's great to fight against slavery but there are many forms of it that we take part in every day. The alternative to slavery was another form of manipulation, just not by way of force.

When governments weren't able to use force to control the people, they adapted to new forms of control, namely through the media and through the use of propaganda. In the end the result is the same, a submisive laborer who is dependent on the very system of consumerism to survive that is causing him to be submisive to certain controlling powers.

Freedom from slavery is not being able to consume as you please, and that's what we have defined it as. Remember, its not "freedom" that one gets, it "the same freedom awareded to everyone else" - whatever those may be. Its freedom because someone called it freedom, but in my opinion it's not true freedom.

But that's why I said ignore my opinion, because it will drag the thread off-topic.

- Oni


This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 02-15-2010 6:41 PM DevilsAdvocate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by Taz, posted 02-16-2010 12:03 AM onifre has responded
 Message 46 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 02-16-2010 8:19 PM onifre has not yet responded

    
Taz
Member (Idle past 1457 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 42 of 50 (547052)
02-16-2010 12:03 AM
Reply to: Message 41 by onifre
02-15-2010 10:45 PM


Re: All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.
onifre writes:

But again, in many cases I like to call out certain hypocrisies and note that we humans advocate many forms of slavery, all be it under other labels.


Is this one of those post-modern metaphorical bullshit where left is the same as right, up is the same down, white is the same as black, a dog is the same as a cat, a 21st century mechanical engineer is the same as a 17th century plantation slave, etc.?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by onifre, posted 02-15-2010 10:45 PM onifre has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by onifre, posted 02-16-2010 12:08 AM Taz has not yet responded

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 1116 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 43 of 50 (547053)
02-16-2010 12:08 AM
Reply to: Message 42 by Taz
02-16-2010 12:03 AM


Re: All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.
Is this one of those post-modern metaphorical bullshit where left is the same as right, up is the same down, white is the same as black, a dog is the same as a cat, a 21st century mechanical engineer is the same as a 17th century plantation slave, etc.?

Que?

- Oni


This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by Taz, posted 02-16-2010 12:03 AM Taz has not yet responded

    
anglagard
Member
Posts: 2189
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 44 of 50 (547076)
02-16-2010 3:19 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by onifre
02-15-2010 4:19 PM


A Different Environment Does Not Confer Ignorance
You need to read more, Mr. Perez.

I strongly suggest Guns, Germs, and Steel, after all it is only considered the top popular science book by those who responded to that question from Pharyngula, beating out even Godel, Escher Bach, a distant second.

If you are too busy to read the best pop-sci (and greatest history book IMO) you could always watch The Gods Must Be Crazy one and two.

After all, what is intelligence other than deeply and knowledgeably adapting to your environment.

Care to trade places? May be interesting to see how long you would last in New Guinea or the Kalahari.

Edited by anglagard, : correct mispelling and a bit more clarity


The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
— Salman Rushdie

This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen


This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by onifre, posted 02-15-2010 4:19 PM onifre has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by onifre, posted 02-16-2010 9:23 AM anglagard has acknowledged this reply

    
onifre
Member (Idle past 1116 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 45 of 50 (547100)
02-16-2010 9:23 AM
Reply to: Message 44 by anglagard
02-16-2010 3:19 AM


Re: A Different Environment Does Not Confer Ignorance
I strongly suggest Guns, Germs, and Steel, after all it is only considered the top popular science book by those who responded to that question from Pharyngula, beating out even Godel, Escher Bach, a distant second.

If you are too busy to read the best pop-sci (and greatest history book IMO) you could always watch The Gods Must Be Crazy one and two.

After all, what is intelligence other than deeply and knowledgeably adapting to your environment.

Care to trade places? May be interesting to see how long you would last in New Guinea or the Kalahari.

Que?

- Oni


This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by anglagard, posted 02-16-2010 3:19 AM anglagard has acknowledged this reply

    
Prev12
3
4Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019