|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On July 26 2017 13:00 TheTenthDoc wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2017 12:56 xDaunt wrote:On July 26 2017 12:51 TheTenthDoc wrote:On July 26 2017 12:47 xDaunt wrote:On July 26 2017 12:42 TheTenthDoc wrote:On July 26 2017 12:29 xDaunt wrote:On July 26 2017 12:16 TheTenthDoc wrote:On July 26 2017 12:08 xDaunt wrote:
I'm seriously confused. Has anyone other than Igne and me ever taken a college-level introduction to Western philosophy course (and actually paid attention)? So is "Western culture" the concepts espoused by select Western philosophers? And when we're contrasting it, we're contrasting it with the concepts espoused by select Middle Eastern/Far East philosophers? But not the ones who rescued Aristotle's teachings, presumably. Because when you talk about "Arab/Muslim culture" you seem to be talking about "what life and the cultural milieu is currently like in Middle Eastern countries" most of the time, which seems like a poor referent for comparison with idealized version of societies. Hence why you ask things along the lines of "where would you rather live?" and talk about things being attacked. Unless I've been misinterpreting. No, culture clearly isn't limited to philosophy. It encompasses everything from the philosophical to the religious to the artistic. It is the sum of a way of life. In defining Western culture, I purposefully took a very broad approach to create a starting point for the discussion. Most aspects of culture flow downhill from values and traditions, so why not start there? So are there any aspects of Western culture you find undesirable or that could be improved? Or are the Inquisition/the Crusades/colonialism/religious monarchies, for example, not aspects of Western culture? Because your broad approach basically listed "things I like about Western culture" which seems like a poor place to start discussion about what makes cultures different and what they can learn from one another. I already addressed this issue in detail here. That reply doesn't really mention if you find anything unsavory or improveable about Western culture? It just kind of says "well, some parts of Western culture changed because of Western culture" or perhaps "some parts are not uniquely Western or were born from other cultures and then changed because of Western thinking and therefore are not really part of Western culture" which is an odd distinction...and doesn't really answer if you think Western culture has any negative points, regardless. I pretty clearly acknowledged in that post that Western culture has had its moral failings (slavery being directly discussed). But, given the discussion that we have been having today, I do have in mind something more current that deserves criticism: Western culture's emerging tradition of self-loathing. That so many people don't see the value in promoting and defending Western culture is truly abhorrent. Wouldn't people back in the times of slavery have found the self-loathing equally abhorrent? Many viewed abolishing slavery as an attack on their culture, after all. The capacity for self-loathing is a necessary quality for improvement.
I would say that the capacity for honest critique is a necessary quality for improvement.
That does leave the question open of what qualifies as "honest critique" and what qualifies as "self-loathing".
|
On July 26 2017 12:47 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2017 12:41 IgnE wrote:On July 26 2017 12:32 Plansix wrote:On July 26 2017 12:24 IgnE wrote:
seriously kwark, if you think anyone is arguing that "aristotle caused jefferson" then you are as impoverished a thinker as P6. Are you really going to lean into the quote from Jefferson in 1825 as proof of something? 15 years after he was president and the only person left to say he was full of himself was his buddy John Adams? I understand the worship of Jefferson, but can we not take his bragging as anything but what it was. He was one of 5 people who wrote that thing. Are you really going to deny a link between Aristotle and almost every single major Western thinker since him? How dim are you? Do you not think that perhaps they could have gotten there without him? Consider the following. Firstly, if they could not have gotten there had Aristotle's books been lost then there must logically be huge untapped realms of philosophy which have lain undiscovered since the books inspiring them were lost. Given the quantity of the totality of human thought that was never written down, never survived, never copied or never read, it seems near impossible that we have touched the surface of philosophy. Unless, of course, multiple people can have similar ideas. Secondly, consider Aquinas' premise that a law that an unjust law (in the eyes of the one bound by it) is no law at all. Do you need Aristotle to get to that point? Because it's a point people hear a lot. Parents especially, in regard to bedtimes and the like. History inevitably produces natural law because people don't like the alternative.
Yeah sure they could have. Then someone else, someone different, writing different texts would have been a different "Aristotle". What is your point? Engaging in alternative history is not illuminating here. I don't understand your causal fetishism here. History works in flows of resources, people, and cultural materials. We are always already talking about a set of texts, artifacts, that collectively we call, "Aristotle" and that are historically and materially linked to some assemblage of human parts and subjectivities that bore the name Aristotle. Western culture is linked to that name.
|
On July 26 2017 12:53 mozoku wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2017 12:43 Plansix wrote:On July 26 2017 12:35 xDaunt wrote:
I just provided a nice source showing how Greek, Roman, and Christian thought all helped shape modern Western concepts of law, rights, and liberties. Why the fuck are you people still arguing about it? It's one thing to not know due to poor education. It's another to stick your head in the sand like an ostrich. We're reaching flat earth society levels of willful ignorance. This thread has hit some lows before, but this might be a new record. Not one is disputing those facts. You know what else influenced western civilization? The crusades. And the Byzantines. And so many other things. I think KwarK actually is though. My education did not focus on neither the classics or philosophy, but I feel comfortable venturing to say that Aristotle and Cicero had far larger influence on Western thought than anyone in the Byzantine Empire.
Cicero was Roman though and failed to do anything in his time to prevent the rise of the empire and the fall of his republic. Aristotle had a following but he failed to effect anything in his time and was killed as a scapegoat.
The "Byzantine Empire" part of Rome was the only thing that was holding onto what remained of civilization in the fall of the WRE. If it wasn't for Justinian and Belesarius western Europe would look little different to what it was before the Romans conquered Gaul. The fall of Constantinople triggered indubitably the Renaissance and the inspiration of ancient philosophers. If it wasn't for the "Byzantine Empire" then no one would know or give a shit about who Aristotle or Cicero even were. Not to mention the Christian vs Muslim theme of the high middle ages or the concept of feudalism and bureaucracy.
|
On July 26 2017 12:56 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2017 12:51 TheTenthDoc wrote:On July 26 2017 12:47 xDaunt wrote:On July 26 2017 12:42 TheTenthDoc wrote:On July 26 2017 12:29 xDaunt wrote:On July 26 2017 12:16 TheTenthDoc wrote:On July 26 2017 12:08 xDaunt wrote:
I'm seriously confused. Has anyone other than Igne and me ever taken a college-level introduction to Western philosophy course (and actually paid attention)? So is "Western culture" the concepts espoused by select Western philosophers? And when we're contrasting it, we're contrasting it with the concepts espoused by select Middle Eastern/Far East philosophers? But not the ones who rescued Aristotle's teachings, presumably. Because when you talk about "Arab/Muslim culture" you seem to be talking about "what life and the cultural milieu is currently like in Middle Eastern countries" most of the time, which seems like a poor referent for comparison with idealized version of societies. Hence why you ask things along the lines of "where would you rather live?" and talk about things being attacked. Unless I've been misinterpreting. No, culture clearly isn't limited to philosophy. It encompasses everything from the philosophical to the religious to the artistic. It is the sum of a way of life. In defining Western culture, I purposefully took a very broad approach to create a starting point for the discussion. Most aspects of culture flow downhill from values and traditions, so why not start there? So are there any aspects of Western culture you find undesirable or that could be improved? Or are the Inquisition/the Crusades/colonialism/religious monarchies, for example, not aspects of Western culture? Because your broad approach basically listed "things I like about Western culture" which seems like a poor place to start discussion about what makes cultures different and what they can learn from one another. I already addressed this issue in detail here. That reply doesn't really mention if you find anything unsavory or improveable about Western culture? It just kind of says "well, some parts of Western culture changed because of Western culture" or perhaps "some parts are not uniquely Western or were born from other cultures and then changed because of Western thinking and therefore are not really part of Western culture" which is an odd distinction...and doesn't really answer if you think Western culture has any negative points, regardless. I pretty clearly acknowledged in that post that Western culture has had its moral failings (slavery being directly discussed). But, given the discussion that we have been having today, I do have in mind something more current that deserves criticism: Western culture's emerging tradition of self-loathing. That so many people don't see the value in promoting and defending Western culture is truly abhorrent.
Are you asking why we don't continue imperialism and forcing others to assimilate to our own defined notions of what is the best way to conduct/govern a society? Honest question.
|
On July 26 2017 12:47 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2017 12:41 IgnE wrote:On July 26 2017 12:32 Plansix wrote:On July 26 2017 12:24 IgnE wrote:
seriously kwark, if you think anyone is arguing that "aristotle caused jefferson" then you are as impoverished a thinker as P6. Are you really going to lean into the quote from Jefferson in 1825 as proof of something? 15 years after he was president and the only person left to say he was full of himself was his buddy John Adams? I understand the worship of Jefferson, but can we not take his bragging as anything but what it was. He was one of 5 people who wrote that thing. Are you really going to deny a link between Aristotle and almost every single major Western thinker since him? How dim are you? Do you not think that perhaps they could have gotten there without him?
I'm not sure "could have" is what's being argued. But if you can assume that some Enlightenment thinker is historically inevitable, the rule you adopt to explain that might make Aristotles inevitable in the same alternate universe so be careful.
On July 26 2017 12:47 KwarK wrote:
Firstly, if they could not have gotten there had Aristotle's books been lost then there must logically be huge untapped realms of philosophy which have lain undiscovered since the books inspiring them were lost.
This isn't self-evident because there may be a correlation between your work not surviving and it being of low utility to others, similar to nobody bothering to cite 80% of humanities papers now. There were great people who we don't have extant, but we know they were great because we heard about them from others.
|
On July 26 2017 13:02 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2017 12:31 xDaunt wrote:On July 26 2017 12:28 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On July 26 2017 12:27 WolfintheSheep wrote:
I'm still waiting for this all to be tied back to concerns about present day culture clashes, but I may be left waiting for a while. I brought it up. I'm waiting as well. I just want to know what's under attack by regressive leftists. Christ, you people are lazy. Start with Igne's post here and read the responses to it and the article that he's referencing. So I went back and I remember this post. I skipped over it because IgnE wrote a fucking thesis. I read it this time around and it still is kind of vague on answering your question. Western culture isn't under attack by leftists. That's an absurd claim in and of itself. The culture isn't under attack. The regressive policies that are being championed by the right are under attack. I don't buy for one second that there are people on the left screaming we need to police words because they are offending people. Instead they are advocating that we try and take into account one's preference for whatever verb they choose. You want to be called a kumquat, you're a kumquat. I don't care because it doesn't affect me. Saying Western culture is being attacked was a can of worms to begin with and you opened it.
That article did nothing but speak of vague generalities about how the far left doesn't like western civilization because it's racist. I was really hoping for something more specific. Where are the politicians, laws, or practices that are emerging as a result of the far left that threaten western civilization? Or am I supposed to assume that flamboyant college campus politics represents the future course of the country?
|
On July 26 2017 13:04 Aquanim wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2017 13:00 TheTenthDoc wrote:On July 26 2017 12:56 xDaunt wrote:On July 26 2017 12:51 TheTenthDoc wrote:On July 26 2017 12:47 xDaunt wrote:On July 26 2017 12:42 TheTenthDoc wrote:On July 26 2017 12:29 xDaunt wrote:On July 26 2017 12:16 TheTenthDoc wrote:On July 26 2017 12:08 xDaunt wrote:
I'm seriously confused. Has anyone other than Igne and me ever taken a college-level introduction to Western philosophy course (and actually paid attention)? So is "Western culture" the concepts espoused by select Western philosophers? And when we're contrasting it, we're contrasting it with the concepts espoused by select Middle Eastern/Far East philosophers? But not the ones who rescued Aristotle's teachings, presumably. Because when you talk about "Arab/Muslim culture" you seem to be talking about "what life and the cultural milieu is currently like in Middle Eastern countries" most of the time, which seems like a poor referent for comparison with idealized version of societies. Hence why you ask things along the lines of "where would you rather live?" and talk about things being attacked. Unless I've been misinterpreting. No, culture clearly isn't limited to philosophy. It encompasses everything from the philosophical to the religious to the artistic. It is the sum of a way of life. In defining Western culture, I purposefully took a very broad approach to create a starting point for the discussion. Most aspects of culture flow downhill from values and traditions, so why not start there? So are there any aspects of Western culture you find undesirable or that could be improved? Or are the Inquisition/the Crusades/colonialism/religious monarchies, for example, not aspects of Western culture? Because your broad approach basically listed "things I like about Western culture" which seems like a poor place to start discussion about what makes cultures different and what they can learn from one another. I already addressed this issue in detail here. That reply doesn't really mention if you find anything unsavory or improveable about Western culture? It just kind of says "well, some parts of Western culture changed because of Western culture" or perhaps "some parts are not uniquely Western or were born from other cultures and then changed because of Western thinking and therefore are not really part of Western culture" which is an odd distinction...and doesn't really answer if you think Western culture has any negative points, regardless. I pretty clearly acknowledged in that post that Western culture has had its moral failings (slavery being directly discussed). But, given the discussion that we have been having today, I do have in mind something more current that deserves criticism: Western culture's emerging tradition of self-loathing. That so many people don't see the value in promoting and defending Western culture is truly abhorrent. Wouldn't people back in the times of slavery have found the self-loathing equally abhorrent? Many viewed abolishing slavery as an attack on their culture, after all. The capacity for self-loathing is a necessary quality for improvement. I would say that the capacity for honest critique is a necessary quality for improvement. That does leave the question open of what qualifies as "honest critique" and what qualifies as "self-loathing".
Unfortunately, I suspect in a great many situations (probably not this one) "honest critique" is loathing things the reader believes should change about the culture and "self-loathing" is loathing things the reader doesn't think should change about the culture.
On July 26 2017 13:03 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2017 13:00 TheTenthDoc wrote:On July 26 2017 12:56 xDaunt wrote:On July 26 2017 12:51 TheTenthDoc wrote:On July 26 2017 12:47 xDaunt wrote:On July 26 2017 12:42 TheTenthDoc wrote:On July 26 2017 12:29 xDaunt wrote:On July 26 2017 12:16 TheTenthDoc wrote:On July 26 2017 12:08 xDaunt wrote:
I'm seriously confused. Has anyone other than Igne and me ever taken a college-level introduction to Western philosophy course (and actually paid attention)? So is "Western culture" the concepts espoused by select Western philosophers? And when we're contrasting it, we're contrasting it with the concepts espoused by select Middle Eastern/Far East philosophers? But not the ones who rescued Aristotle's teachings, presumably. Because when you talk about "Arab/Muslim culture" you seem to be talking about "what life and the cultural milieu is currently like in Middle Eastern countries" most of the time, which seems like a poor referent for comparison with idealized version of societies. Hence why you ask things along the lines of "where would you rather live?" and talk about things being attacked. Unless I've been misinterpreting. No, culture clearly isn't limited to philosophy. It encompasses everything from the philosophical to the religious to the artistic. It is the sum of a way of life. In defining Western culture, I purposefully took a very broad approach to create a starting point for the discussion. Most aspects of culture flow downhill from values and traditions, so why not start there? So are there any aspects of Western culture you find undesirable or that could be improved? Or are the Inquisition/the Crusades/colonialism/religious monarchies, for example, not aspects of Western culture? Because your broad approach basically listed "things I like about Western culture" which seems like a poor place to start discussion about what makes cultures different and what they can learn from one another. I already addressed this issue in detail here. That reply doesn't really mention if you find anything unsavory or improveable about Western culture? It just kind of says "well, some parts of Western culture changed because of Western culture" or perhaps "some parts are not uniquely Western or were born from other cultures and then changed because of Western thinking and therefore are not really part of Western culture" which is an odd distinction...and doesn't really answer if you think Western culture has any negative points, regardless. I pretty clearly acknowledged in that post that Western culture has had its moral failings (slavery being directly discussed). But, given the discussion that we have been having today, I do have in mind something more current that deserves criticism: Western culture's emerging tradition of self-loathing. That so many people don't see the value in promoting and defending Western culture is truly abhorrent. Wouldn't people back in the times of slavery have found the self-loathing equally abhorrent? No, because the abolitionist argument was never against Western culture itself. It was against slavery. If anything, the abolitionist arguments were rooted in Western culture. What has emerged in the past hundred years is a cultural relativism that is inherently dangerous.
The arguments were against a cultural component, but not the culture itself? What draws the line between the two? Do you think people at the time said, "shoot, they're right, this isn't Western culture, it's just how we live and how we lived for a century." There's no easy split, especially when aspects of the culture itself are self-contradictory.
Anyway, we can let this sit because I think I understand what you mean by Western culture (its positive fundamentals) and why you see people criticizing or modifying this Western culture as an attack (though they may not be criticizing those fundamentals).
|
On July 26 2017 13:06 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2017 12:56 xDaunt wrote:On July 26 2017 12:51 TheTenthDoc wrote:On July 26 2017 12:47 xDaunt wrote:On July 26 2017 12:42 TheTenthDoc wrote:On July 26 2017 12:29 xDaunt wrote:On July 26 2017 12:16 TheTenthDoc wrote:On July 26 2017 12:08 xDaunt wrote:
I'm seriously confused. Has anyone other than Igne and me ever taken a college-level introduction to Western philosophy course (and actually paid attention)? So is "Western culture" the concepts espoused by select Western philosophers? And when we're contrasting it, we're contrasting it with the concepts espoused by select Middle Eastern/Far East philosophers? But not the ones who rescued Aristotle's teachings, presumably. Because when you talk about "Arab/Muslim culture" you seem to be talking about "what life and the cultural milieu is currently like in Middle Eastern countries" most of the time, which seems like a poor referent for comparison with idealized version of societies. Hence why you ask things along the lines of "where would you rather live?" and talk about things being attacked. Unless I've been misinterpreting. No, culture clearly isn't limited to philosophy. It encompasses everything from the philosophical to the religious to the artistic. It is the sum of a way of life. In defining Western culture, I purposefully took a very broad approach to create a starting point for the discussion. Most aspects of culture flow downhill from values and traditions, so why not start there? So are there any aspects of Western culture you find undesirable or that could be improved? Or are the Inquisition/the Crusades/colonialism/religious monarchies, for example, not aspects of Western culture? Because your broad approach basically listed "things I like about Western culture" which seems like a poor place to start discussion about what makes cultures different and what they can learn from one another. I already addressed this issue in detail here. That reply doesn't really mention if you find anything unsavory or improveable about Western culture? It just kind of says "well, some parts of Western culture changed because of Western culture" or perhaps "some parts are not uniquely Western or were born from other cultures and then changed because of Western thinking and therefore are not really part of Western culture" which is an odd distinction...and doesn't really answer if you think Western culture has any negative points, regardless. I pretty clearly acknowledged in that post that Western culture has had its moral failings (slavery being directly discussed). But, given the discussion that we have been having today, I do have in mind something more current that deserves criticism: Western culture's emerging tradition of self-loathing. That so many people don't see the value in promoting and defending Western culture is truly abhorrent. Are you asking why we don't continue imperialism and forcing others to assimilate to our own defined notions of what is the best way to conduct/govern a society? Honest question.
No, I'm not arguing for or against any particular practice that may construed as Western culture. I'm merely making the argument that Western culture is worth defending, valuing, and promoting in light of the intellectual attack it has come under from the Left. And I'm highly amused that so many people are questioning why one might think that Western culture is under attack when literally no one in this thread other than me seems to give half a shit about Western culture and when the common sentiment is that people like me who defend Western culture are the new kind of racists.
|
United States44187 Posts
On July 26 2017 12:53 mozoku wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2017 12:43 Plansix wrote:On July 26 2017 12:35 xDaunt wrote:
I just provided a nice source showing how Greek, Roman, and Christian thought all helped shape modern Western concepts of law, rights, and liberties. Why the fuck are you people still arguing about it? It's one thing to not know due to poor education. It's another to stick your head in the sand like an ostrich. We're reaching flat earth society levels of willful ignorance. This thread has hit some lows before, but this might be a new record. Not one is disputing those facts. You know what else influenced western civilization? The crusades. And the Byzantines. And so many other things. I think KwarK actually is though. My education did not focus on neither the classics or philosophy, but I feel comfortable venturing to say that Aristotle and Cicero had far larger influence on Western thinking than anyone in the Byzantine Empire.
Debatable. For example.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corpus_Juris_Civilis
You need to remember that the Byzantine Empire was the Roman Empire, continuing for another thousand years in one form or another, preserving a lot of the ideas from Rome, building upon them, and then ditching them in what became the Renaissance. Scholarly works did not cease between 400 AD and 1200 AD, they just ceased in the West. The greatest schools on Aristotelianism were Byzantine, such as the University of Constantinople. Even if you argue that the good stuff was the pre-Byzantine stuff, there was a thousand years of Byzantine stewardship of it before the west got a hold of it.
My argument is twofold. Firstly, the classics have largely been turned into a foundation myth that bear essentially no relationship with the reality. Nowhere is this more apparent than "Greek democracy". Secondly, that history follows a somewhat inevitable path that was always going to lead to the opposition of tyranny and so forth.
Everything impacts and influences everything but placing a pin on Greece and saying this is where we come from is a myth and frankly bad history.
|
Kwark is 100% correct. History is studied with the understanding that we have imperfect information. We only know what people bothered to write down and that survived. There is nothing "alternative" about a history where enlightenment thoughts developed without direct influence of Aristotle, because it very likely happened. Indirect influence is impossible to measure. No real historian is sure of anything. Anyone who has done primary source research become instantly aware of how little we truly know.
|
On July 26 2017 13:06 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2017 12:56 xDaunt wrote:On July 26 2017 12:51 TheTenthDoc wrote:On July 26 2017 12:47 xDaunt wrote:On July 26 2017 12:42 TheTenthDoc wrote:On July 26 2017 12:29 xDaunt wrote:On July 26 2017 12:16 TheTenthDoc wrote:On July 26 2017 12:08 xDaunt wrote:
I'm seriously confused. Has anyone other than Igne and me ever taken a college-level introduction to Western philosophy course (and actually paid attention)? So is "Western culture" the concepts espoused by select Western philosophers? And when we're contrasting it, we're contrasting it with the concepts espoused by select Middle Eastern/Far East philosophers? But not the ones who rescued Aristotle's teachings, presumably. Because when you talk about "Arab/Muslim culture" you seem to be talking about "what life and the cultural milieu is currently like in Middle Eastern countries" most of the time, which seems like a poor referent for comparison with idealized version of societies. Hence why you ask things along the lines of "where would you rather live?" and talk about things being attacked. Unless I've been misinterpreting. No, culture clearly isn't limited to philosophy. It encompasses everything from the philosophical to the religious to the artistic. It is the sum of a way of life. In defining Western culture, I purposefully took a very broad approach to create a starting point for the discussion. Most aspects of culture flow downhill from values and traditions, so why not start there? So are there any aspects of Western culture you find undesirable or that could be improved? Or are the Inquisition/the Crusades/colonialism/religious monarchies, for example, not aspects of Western culture? Because your broad approach basically listed "things I like about Western culture" which seems like a poor place to start discussion about what makes cultures different and what they can learn from one another. I already addressed this issue in detail here. That reply doesn't really mention if you find anything unsavory or improveable about Western culture? It just kind of says "well, some parts of Western culture changed because of Western culture" or perhaps "some parts are not uniquely Western or were born from other cultures and then changed because of Western thinking and therefore are not really part of Western culture" which is an odd distinction...and doesn't really answer if you think Western culture has any negative points, regardless. I pretty clearly acknowledged in that post that Western culture has had its moral failings (slavery being directly discussed). But, given the discussion that we have been having today, I do have in mind something more current that deserves criticism: Western culture's emerging tradition of self-loathing. That so many people don't see the value in promoting and defending Western culture is truly abhorrent. Are you asking why we don't continue imperialism and forcing others to assimilate to our own defined notions of what is the best way to conduct/govern a society? Honest question.
If there is any truth to "western culture" being under attack I think it has to be in this. Western civilization repeats the themes of "bringing civilization to the unwashed barbarians". Imperialism and forcing others to assimilate to our way of doing things is the legacy of everything that we are today. In many cases our way of doing things is better then other peoples and I won't hear anyone saying otherwise. That we should or shouldn't force other people to do things our way is the real development in the modern age.
|
On July 26 2017 13:07 TheTenthDoc wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2017 13:03 xDaunt wrote:On July 26 2017 13:00 TheTenthDoc wrote:On July 26 2017 12:56 xDaunt wrote:On July 26 2017 12:51 TheTenthDoc wrote:On July 26 2017 12:47 xDaunt wrote:On July 26 2017 12:42 TheTenthDoc wrote:On July 26 2017 12:29 xDaunt wrote:On July 26 2017 12:16 TheTenthDoc wrote:On July 26 2017 12:08 xDaunt wrote:
I'm seriously confused. Has anyone other than Igne and me ever taken a college-level introduction to Western philosophy course (and actually paid attention)? So is "Western culture" the concepts espoused by select Western philosophers? And when we're contrasting it, we're contrasting it with the concepts espoused by select Middle Eastern/Far East philosophers? But not the ones who rescued Aristotle's teachings, presumably. Because when you talk about "Arab/Muslim culture" you seem to be talking about "what life and the cultural milieu is currently like in Middle Eastern countries" most of the time, which seems like a poor referent for comparison with idealized version of societies. Hence why you ask things along the lines of "where would you rather live?" and talk about things being attacked. Unless I've been misinterpreting. No, culture clearly isn't limited to philosophy. It encompasses everything from the philosophical to the religious to the artistic. It is the sum of a way of life. In defining Western culture, I purposefully took a very broad approach to create a starting point for the discussion. Most aspects of culture flow downhill from values and traditions, so why not start there? So are there any aspects of Western culture you find undesirable or that could be improved? Or are the Inquisition/the Crusades/colonialism/religious monarchies, for example, not aspects of Western culture? Because your broad approach basically listed "things I like about Western culture" which seems like a poor place to start discussion about what makes cultures different and what they can learn from one another. I already addressed this issue in detail here. That reply doesn't really mention if you find anything unsavory or improveable about Western culture? It just kind of says "well, some parts of Western culture changed because of Western culture" or perhaps "some parts are not uniquely Western or were born from other cultures and then changed because of Western thinking and therefore are not really part of Western culture" which is an odd distinction...and doesn't really answer if you think Western culture has any negative points, regardless. I pretty clearly acknowledged in that post that Western culture has had its moral failings (slavery being directly discussed). But, given the discussion that we have been having today, I do have in mind something more current that deserves criticism: Western culture's emerging tradition of self-loathing. That so many people don't see the value in promoting and defending Western culture is truly abhorrent. Wouldn't people back in the times of slavery have found the self-loathing equally abhorrent? No, because the abolitionist argument was never against Western culture itself. It was against slavery. If anything, the abolitionist arguments were rooted in Western culture. What has emerged in the past hundred years is a cultural relativism that is inherently dangerous. The arguments were against a cultural component, but not the culture itself? What draws the line between the two? Do you think people at the time said, "shoot, they're right, this isn't Western culture, it's just how we live and how we lived for a century." There's no easy split, especially when aspects of the culture itself are self-contradictory. Anyway, we can let this sit because I think I understand what you mean by Western culture (its positive fundamentals) and why you see people criticizing or modifying this Western culture as an attack (though they may not be criticizing those fundamentals).
Culture isn't static. It's ever-evolving. You can look at any epoch in time and see forces competing that will eventually determine the course of a culture. It's all about the battle of ideas. My point is that Western culture has evolved philosophically to a point where the intellectual class is now actively questioning the legitimacy of Western culture in the first place. Traditionally, existential threats to a culture came from the outside. Now we are seeing one come from the inside.
|
On July 26 2017 13:07 Tachion wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2017 13:02 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On July 26 2017 12:31 xDaunt wrote:On July 26 2017 12:28 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On July 26 2017 12:27 WolfintheSheep wrote:
I'm still waiting for this all to be tied back to concerns about present day culture clashes, but I may be left waiting for a while. I brought it up. I'm waiting as well. I just want to know what's under attack by regressive leftists. Christ, you people are lazy. Start with Igne's post here and read the responses to it and the article that he's referencing. So I went back and I remember this post. I skipped over it because IgnE wrote a fucking thesis. I read it this time around and it still is kind of vague on answering your question. Western culture isn't under attack by leftists. That's an absurd claim in and of itself. The culture isn't under attack. The regressive policies that are being championed by the right are under attack. I don't buy for one second that there are people on the left screaming we need to police words because they are offending people. Instead they are advocating that we try and take into account one's preference for whatever verb they choose. You want to be called a kumquat, you're a kumquat. I don't care because it doesn't affect me. Saying Western culture is being attacked was a can of worms to begin with and you opened it. That article did nothing but speak of vague generalities about how the far left doesn't like western civilization because it's racist. I was really hoping for something more specific. Where are the politicians, laws, or practices that are emerging as a result of the far left that threaten western civilization? Or am I supposed to assume that flamboyant college campus politics represents the future course of the country?
That's what we wanted to know this entire time. For those not able to access that article due to a paywall, what is under attack? How is it under attack? You can point that essential civil liberties are under attack from the right and populate that statement with a myriad of different sources, all stemming from the policies that they are putting into place. Where are the lefts policies that are attacking your concept of western culture that you hold dear? While I'm sure everyone in this discussion will agree to the broad definition that you gave, xDaunt, I doubt we agree on what the minute details that make up western culture and how pervasive it is in the world. WC is not as great as you claim it to be and it isn't the only mode that people enjoy.
|
On July 26 2017 13:06 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2017 12:53 mozoku wrote:On July 26 2017 12:43 Plansix wrote:On July 26 2017 12:35 xDaunt wrote:
I just provided a nice source showing how Greek, Roman, and Christian thought all helped shape modern Western concepts of law, rights, and liberties. Why the fuck are you people still arguing about it? It's one thing to not know due to poor education. It's another to stick your head in the sand like an ostrich. We're reaching flat earth society levels of willful ignorance. This thread has hit some lows before, but this might be a new record. Not one is disputing those facts. You know what else influenced western civilization? The crusades. And the Byzantines. And so many other things. I think KwarK actually is though. My education did not focus on neither the classics or philosophy, but I feel comfortable venturing to say that Aristotle and Cicero had far larger influence on Western thought than anyone in the Byzantine Empire. Cicero was Roman though and failed to do anything in his time to prevent the rise of the empire and the fall of his republic. Aristotle had a following but he failed to effect anything in his time and was killed as a scapegoat. The "Byzantine Empire" part of Rome was the only thing that was holding onto what remained of civilization in the fall of the WRE. If it wasn't for Justinian and Belesarius western Europe would look little different to what it was before the Romans conquered Gaul. The fall of Constantinople triggered indubitably the Renaissance and the inspiration of ancient philosophers. If it wasn't for the "Byzantine Empire" then no one would know or give a shit about who Aristotle or Cicero even were. Not to mention the Christian vs Muslim theme of the high middle ages or the concept of feudalism and bureaucracy.
If history was different, Western thought would look different. The fact remains that modern Western thought draws a lot more influence from Aristotle than any Byzantine thinkers.
For the record, I'm in general agreement with xDaunt that Left (large generalization here) has stopped seeing Western culture objectively in favor of cultural relativism and misplaced self-loathing. That is not the same as saying aspects of Western culture shouldn't be improved.
|
On July 26 2017 13:10 xDaunt wrote:...
And I'm highly amused that so many people are questioning why one might think that Western culture is under attack when literally no one in this thread other than me seems to give half a shit about Western culture and when the common sentiment is that people like me who defend Western culture are the new kind of racists.
I can't speak for anybody else in this thread, but...
As far as I am concerned any particular element of "Western culture" is only worth defending if that particular element improves the world (in terms of how much I want to live in it).
It so happens that I do think many parts of Western culture are worthwhile and worth defending. However, I would only choose to defend those elements on their own merits, and not because they are part of "Western culture".
To say that something is worth defending because it is "Western culture" and therefore good is a non-argument and (while I lack data at this time) it would not surprise me to find that this non-argument is used to defend many things that are not morally or practically justifiable with legitimate arguments. Such as racism.
I think that this conversation is only going to be productive if you produce specific concrete examples of aspects of "Western culture", defend them on their own merits, and demonstrate that those aspects in particular are currently "under attack" according to whatever definition.
|
On July 26 2017 13:14 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2017 13:06 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On July 26 2017 12:56 xDaunt wrote:On July 26 2017 12:51 TheTenthDoc wrote:On July 26 2017 12:47 xDaunt wrote:On July 26 2017 12:42 TheTenthDoc wrote:On July 26 2017 12:29 xDaunt wrote:On July 26 2017 12:16 TheTenthDoc wrote:On July 26 2017 12:08 xDaunt wrote:
I'm seriously confused. Has anyone other than Igne and me ever taken a college-level introduction to Western philosophy course (and actually paid attention)? So is "Western culture" the concepts espoused by select Western philosophers? And when we're contrasting it, we're contrasting it with the concepts espoused by select Middle Eastern/Far East philosophers? But not the ones who rescued Aristotle's teachings, presumably. Because when you talk about "Arab/Muslim culture" you seem to be talking about "what life and the cultural milieu is currently like in Middle Eastern countries" most of the time, which seems like a poor referent for comparison with idealized version of societies. Hence why you ask things along the lines of "where would you rather live?" and talk about things being attacked. Unless I've been misinterpreting. No, culture clearly isn't limited to philosophy. It encompasses everything from the philosophical to the religious to the artistic. It is the sum of a way of life. In defining Western culture, I purposefully took a very broad approach to create a starting point for the discussion. Most aspects of culture flow downhill from values and traditions, so why not start there? So are there any aspects of Western culture you find undesirable or that could be improved? Or are the Inquisition/the Crusades/colonialism/religious monarchies, for example, not aspects of Western culture? Because your broad approach basically listed "things I like about Western culture" which seems like a poor place to start discussion about what makes cultures different and what they can learn from one another. I already addressed this issue in detail here. That reply doesn't really mention if you find anything unsavory or improveable about Western culture? It just kind of says "well, some parts of Western culture changed because of Western culture" or perhaps "some parts are not uniquely Western or were born from other cultures and then changed because of Western thinking and therefore are not really part of Western culture" which is an odd distinction...and doesn't really answer if you think Western culture has any negative points, regardless. I pretty clearly acknowledged in that post that Western culture has had its moral failings (slavery being directly discussed). But, given the discussion that we have been having today, I do have in mind something more current that deserves criticism: Western culture's emerging tradition of self-loathing. That so many people don't see the value in promoting and defending Western culture is truly abhorrent. Are you asking why we don't continue imperialism and forcing others to assimilate to our own defined notions of what is the best way to conduct/govern a society? Honest question. If there is any truth to "western culture" being under attack I think it has to be in this. Western civilization repeats the themes of "bringing civilization to the unwashed barbarians". Imperialism and forcing others to assimilate to our way of doing things is the legacy of everything that we are today. In many cases our way of doing things is better then other peoples and I won't hear anyone saying otherwise. That we should or shouldn't force other people to do things our way is the real development in the modern age.
I can understand where you're coming from. And I agree to a certain extent that the West has a better way of doing a lot of things. I just don't understand how WC is under attack and it's given to the left. Why can't the right be attacking western culture?
On July 26 2017 13:14 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2017 13:07 TheTenthDoc wrote:On July 26 2017 13:03 xDaunt wrote:On July 26 2017 13:00 TheTenthDoc wrote:On July 26 2017 12:56 xDaunt wrote:On July 26 2017 12:51 TheTenthDoc wrote:On July 26 2017 12:47 xDaunt wrote:On July 26 2017 12:42 TheTenthDoc wrote:On July 26 2017 12:29 xDaunt wrote:On July 26 2017 12:16 TheTenthDoc wrote:
[quote]
So is "Western culture" the concepts espoused by select Western philosophers? And when we're contrasting it, we're contrasting it with the concepts espoused by select Middle Eastern/Far East philosophers? But not the ones who rescued Aristotle's teachings, presumably.
Because when you talk about "Arab/Muslim culture" you seem to be talking about "what life and the cultural milieu is currently like in Middle Eastern countries" most of the time, which seems like a poor referent for comparison with idealized version of societies. Hence why you ask things along the lines of "where would you rather live?" and talk about things being attacked. Unless I've been misinterpreting. No, culture clearly isn't limited to philosophy. It encompasses everything from the philosophical to the religious to the artistic. It is the sum of a way of life. In defining Western culture, I purposefully took a very broad approach to create a starting point for the discussion. Most aspects of culture flow downhill from values and traditions, so why not start there? So are there any aspects of Western culture you find undesirable or that could be improved? Or are the Inquisition/the Crusades/colonialism/religious monarchies, for example, not aspects of Western culture? Because your broad approach basically listed "things I like about Western culture" which seems like a poor place to start discussion about what makes cultures different and what they can learn from one another. I already addressed this issue in detail here. That reply doesn't really mention if you find anything unsavory or improveable about Western culture? It just kind of says "well, some parts of Western culture changed because of Western culture" or perhaps "some parts are not uniquely Western or were born from other cultures and then changed because of Western thinking and therefore are not really part of Western culture" which is an odd distinction...and doesn't really answer if you think Western culture has any negative points, regardless. I pretty clearly acknowledged in that post that Western culture has had its moral failings (slavery being directly discussed). But, given the discussion that we have been having today, I do have in mind something more current that deserves criticism: Western culture's emerging tradition of self-loathing. That so many people don't see the value in promoting and defending Western culture is truly abhorrent. Wouldn't people back in the times of slavery have found the self-loathing equally abhorrent? No, because the abolitionist argument was never against Western culture itself. It was against slavery. If anything, the abolitionist arguments were rooted in Western culture. What has emerged in the past hundred years is a cultural relativism that is inherently dangerous. The arguments were against a cultural component, but not the culture itself? What draws the line between the two? Do you think people at the time said, "shoot, they're right, this isn't Western culture, it's just how we live and how we lived for a century." There's no easy split, especially when aspects of the culture itself are self-contradictory. Anyway, we can let this sit because I think I understand what you mean by Western culture (its positive fundamentals) and why you see people criticizing or modifying this Western culture as an attack (though they may not be criticizing those fundamentals). Culture isn't static. It's ever-evolving. You can look at any epoch in time and see forces competing that will eventually determine the course of a culture. It's all about the battle of ideas. My point is that Western culture has evolved philosophically to a point where the intellectual class is now actively questioning the legitimacy of Western culture in the first place. Traditionally, existential threats to a culture came from the outside. Now we are seeing one come from the inside.
You say culture is ever-evolving. Why can't the basis of WC be evolving? Everything needs to be questioned as we progress as a society and if it's WC's turn, then so be it.
|
Western culture is under attack by the Other and those that do not believe its superiority. Those who have studied The later book and no longer believe superior ideas drive history and culture.
|
On July 26 2017 13:11 Plansix wrote:
Kwark is 100% correct. History is studied with the understanding that we have imperfect information. We only know what people bothered to write down and that survived. There is nothing "alternative" about a history where enlightenment thoughts developed without direct influence of Aristotle, because it very likely happened. Indirect influence is impossible to measure. No real historian is sure of anything. Anyone who has done primary source research become instantly aware of how little we truly know.
you are 100% wrong. it very likely did not happen. jefferson was not writing about the celtic plumber joe, im sorry to tell you
|
On July 26 2017 07:40 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2017 07:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 26 2017 07:32 xDaunt wrote:On July 26 2017 07:23 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 26 2017 07:15 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Is "Western culture" even really a thing? The UK is largely different than the US, let alone the differences between West Virginia and New York, or New Hampshire and Scotland. It seems almost impossible to reconcile every single "Western" culture under a singe umbrella. Pretty much, even sillier and Americentric to imagine we're a beacon of "Western Culture". Usually what people like xDaunt mean by "Western Culture" is "the good parts" of select groups of white people throughout history. The atrocities and oppression perpetuated and institutionalized are an aberration of western culture rather than it's substance despite it's consistency and pervasiveness. See, I think that many on the left inherently want to reject Western culture because it is predominantly the product of white men. This is utterly ridiculous on its face, of course. And like I already pointed out, the framework through which they attack Western culture is the product of Western culture. roflmao. Be clear, people have tried to explain the problematic nature of white supremacy to folks using every possible avenue. It just only accepts (barely at that) arguments formed in it's own culture. The people who conflate white supremacy with Western culture are mostly the Leftists who deride Western culture and the very small (and largely irrelevant) segment of people who are actual white supremacists. That should tell you all that you need to know about how good your argument is.
White supremacy is quite literally a creation of "western culture" and turned quite nicely into the "Western Supremacy" you're putting forth here.
You seem to misunderstand my outright dismissal of the idea that "Western Culture" is a thing, for rejecting "the culture". I do reject much of "capitalism culture" though, because it allows for things like owning people.
I mean we still have a provision in our constitution allowing for slavery. "Western culture" is such a dumb concept I can't believe the conversation went on as long as it did.
|
United States44187 Posts
On July 26 2017 13:19 Aquanim wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2017 13:10 xDaunt wrote:...
And I'm highly amused that so many people are questioning why one might think that Western culture is under attack when literally no one in this thread other than me seems to give half a shit about Western culture and when the common sentiment is that people like me who defend Western culture are the new kind of racists. I can't speak for anybody else in this thread, but... As far as I am concerned any particular element of "Western culture" is only worth defending if that particular element improves the world (in terms of how much I want to live in it). It so happens that I do think many parts of Western culture are worthwhile and worth defending. However, I would only choose to defend those elements on their own merits, and not because they are part of "Western culture". To say that something is worth defending because it is "Western culture" and therefore good is a non-argument and (while I lack data at this time) it would not surprise me to find that this non-argument is used to defend many things that are not morally or practically justifiable with legitimate arguments. Such as racism. I think that this conversation is only going to be productive if you produce specific concrete examples of aspects of "Western culture", defend them on their own merits, and demonstrate that those aspects in particular are currently "under attack" according to whatever definition.
The "threat" to western culture is coming from western culture, same as it always was. Same as those abolitionists back in the day, or the miscegenation, or the gays getting married.On July 26 2017 07:32 KwarK wrote:
The good parts of our culture that are worth saving and propagating speak for themselves and win on their own merits. The bad parts, they die on their own merits too. Institutionalized homophobia used to be an entrenched part of western culture. Now it's disappearing. When conservatives decide that western culture needs defending to preserve it they're not talking about the good parts. Shit like the idea of the war against Christmas, for example. Christmas is becoming a secular holiday because it exists in a broadly secular society and is enjoyed by people of diverse faiths and cultural backgrounds. The war against Christmas is better understood to be the westernization of Christmas. Those who wish to fight back against this process do not do so out of a desire to defend western values.
We don't need crusaders to defend western values, any idea which can't win battles by itself is an idea not worth saving.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
