A refreshing look at Western Civ 2nd only maybe to Toynbee

[woodsmoke]

Hi
This has nothing to do with Linux or maybe it does...dunno...
But, I have taken a LOT of history courses starting in high school and throughout my undergrad.. finally kind of finishing with "History of the Renaissance and Reformation" course...and NONE of it really "spoke" to me as describing a way of actually...don't know how to say it... really "explaining why" this or that has happened except for a long litany of kings killing other kings or church people killing kings or vice versa.

Until I read Toynbee when I was in the Navy.. NO...NOT the full 16 volume set which is 15 volumes of actual DATA... but the first summary book.

He was on the front cover of, I think, TIME magazine and the article described his thesis and finished by saying something like...

"He comes in and out of vogue, mostly out of vogue, because IF WHAT HE PROPOSES IS CORRECT ...then ALL of the other "historical analysis / theory / etc. of academia for a century is automatically so much dead weight and can be use as door stops.".

I, personally found his ideas refreshing and have mentioned him in my lectures on "populations" for ...dunno... twenty years... Today, I have a couple of slides in my presentation with the image from time included. the students are, of course, bored but...hey, even though they are getting "technical" education, they are also SUPPOSED to be getting at least SOME "liberal arts education".

Well, THIS guy... really does have a thought provoking idea...and I curiously find reference to it in TWO EXTERNAL OCCURRENCES...that i viewed on t.v. then and now.

When Trump took office CNN or some other schlock news group went to Afghanistan and filmed TEENAGE GIRLS in a Madras... they were all dressed in white and had only one textbook, the KORAN and were all trained to repeat 'in unison" ONE THING...and I will attempt a quote:

"We, ( Muslims ) INVENTED your sciences and you give us NO CREDIT".

Well, they are correct... but miss one thing...they invented the sciences but then completely DROPPED any development...

Another statement...

GENERICALLY ...just what has been the "mantra" of the "environentalists" for decades? That Western Civilization is "destroying the world"...
GENERICALLY... ANTIFA and BLM and others of the ilk chant stuff TO A TOM - TOM drum that "white folks"...( read western civilization ) , also "business"...read westerncivilization ) etc...need to be "got rid of" after they get rid of the "police"...

The above stated groups are referred to by some as "anarchists"...but that classification does not REALLY provide a solution...amicable to BOTH sides... other than "lock 'em up" or "kill whitey"...

The thesis of this book ..."might"...provide a new perspectve... that of "vertical familial grouping" as opposed to "lateral / organizational grouping". dunno...just a thought..

There are parts of the article that really DO... reference what these people SAY that they "hate"... "western civilization"... and ...generally, are of a "different societal structure"...

LATE BREAKING NEWS...the 8 members of the "New Afrikan Black Panther Part that were arrested for rioting in NYC ... are NOT BLACK OR POOR...they are ALL..."rich white kids"... again... what brought them together...?

https://nypost.com/2020/09/09/inside...nhattan-riots/

I'm not saying anything AGAINST ANTIFA or BLM or any of that what I AM saying is that the thesis of the man really does...kind of "predict" the statements that we hear daily or heard "once on CNN" a few years ago..

Soooo the article is about a new refreshing look at WHY... and then...later..."how"...western civilization MIGHT be the constructed the way that it is...

And if it is correct then COULD ...itt FINALLY might give a "perspective" as to how "we in the west"...

BUT ALSO...how "we in the east"

might finally have a point of common discussion as to how to "resolve' ...maybe... the "differences" between seemingly disparate world views of various peoples...

To state it baldly...recognition of this "might" be a way for "the west" to understand the cultural mindset of "the east" AND VICE VERSA..

One wonders if there is an "equivalency" in say... the Muhammed's approach to "building a religion" to the Catholics..."building a religion"...

and IF there is...how do EITHER..."mindsets" really relate to the modern "industrial complex" that dominates "western' civilization and SEEMINGLY...is beginning to dominate "eastern" civilization.

hmmmm

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine...=pocket-newtab

woodthinkingsmoke

NOTE ON TOYNBEE...

His thesis, which he backed up with 15 books of data can be kind of baldly stated as:

Societies "develop" or "do not develop" because of either "too much pressure" or "too little pressure" on them from "outside forces" such as "attacks by other groups" or by "environment".

Several very extreme examples.

Eskimos "did not develop" because they live in such an EXTREME environment.
Polynesions "did not develop" because they live in such a BENIGN environment.
The Chinese 'started to develop because they had several highly variedd environments which placed MODERATE environmental pressure on the society and they had MODERATE pressure from outside groups attacking them. but then the "Great Wall" was built and there was NO PRESSURE from outside groups attacking them and they "refined themselves but then stagnated".
The Europeans had MODERATE climate pressures and "about equal" attacks against each other which could be called MODERATE and thus developed more than the Chinese.
The U.S. had MODERATE and variable climate with very "light" attack pressure from the Native Indians and after defeating the British no "attack pressure" and so could "develop ideally".

[GreyGeek]

Interesting. I've never read Toynbee. Basically, I rarely read anything that isn't science related, but I'll have to give his summary a look over. However, the idea that Muslims "invented" science is too far fetched. "Science" began almost 1,000 years BEFORE Mohammad created the Islamic religion around 600AD. The first textbook was Euclid's Elements. THAT is an awesome collection of writings which begin with the definition of a point and then a line, and upon which Math was built, and on Math Physics was built. Chemistry was built on Physics, and Biology was built on Chemistry. Psychology was built on .... well, perhaps statistics, but you know what they say about "lies, white lies and statistics". With statistics and a word salad you can prove almost anything, regardless of how ridiculous it is. It says a lot that today most recent advancements in science are based on statistical analysis. Few scientists design null hypothesis experiments to prove their hypotheses wrong these days, and several branches go back to historical data and change it to align with their current computer models. Lysenkoism reborn.


BTW, the BLM was started by three women who described themselves as "trained organizers and trained Marxists", so there is little doubt as to what platform they stand on and their desire to destroy our Republic. However, this news is not new. Neither is the news that the AntiFa organization also is Marxist.

[jlittle]

civilisations ... he concluded that they rose by responding successfully to challenges under the leadership of creative minorities composed of elite leaders

I'd gained the impression that you didn't like elites.

For me, the wikipedia classification of complete bollocks would apply.

[woodsmoke]

Interesting. I've never read Toynbee. Basically, I rarely read anything that isn't science related, but I'll have to give his summary a look over. However, the idea that Muslims "invented" science is too far fetched. "Science" began almost 1,000 years BEFORE Mohammad created the Islamic religion around 600AD. The first textbook was Euclid's Elements. THAT is an awesome collection of writings which begin with the definition of a point and then a line, and upon which Math was built, and on Math Physics was built. Chemistry was built on Physics, and Biology was built on Chemistry. Psychology was built on ... well, perhaps statistics, but you know what they say about "lies, white lies and statistics".

With statistics and a word salad you can prove almost anything, regardless of how ridiculous it is. It says a lot that today most recent advancements in science are based on statistical analysis. Few scientists design null hypothesis experiments to prove their hypotheses wrong these days, and several branches go back to historical data and change it to align with their current computer models. Lysenkoism reborn.

BTW, the BLM was started by three women who described themselves as "trained organizers and trained Marxists", so there is little doubt as to what platform they stand on and their desire to destroy our Republic. However, this news is not new. Neither is the news that the AntiFa organization also is Marxist.

I quite agree with your assessment about "who started / when it was started " science. But that one clip, apparently affected the thinking of a LOT of people...
thanks for the comment!
woodsmoke

[woodsmoke]

I'd gained the impression that you didn't like elites.

For me, the wikipedia classification of complete bollocks would apply.

lol
you might get that impression but no. By any kind of academic definition I am "an elite" in terms of my training / education / background / .etc. ..however, I do not fit the "self styled" elites self classification of what is an elite and so therefore i am "not" an elite... and they HATE it... I actually fit all of the "old" definition of a "Renaissance Man".. and they know it AND they know that they DO NOT... lol...but hey...

My undergraduate conservation teacher had "individual interviews" with all of his students and they almost ALL reported that he kind of "asked me what I wanted to do with myself and thank you...NEXT"...

But, he actually visited with me...that was back in the day when people could "smoke" and he went through half of a "bulldog" pipe smoking, I think, Carter Hall, and at the end he said something like...

"you really do have two choices ...

a) go ahead and get a pHD in biology or chemistry or physics or whatever you want... and go down a hole of specialization that may, or may not, serve your REAL interests well...whatever those interests may be".
b) get TWO masters degrees, one maybe in biology and the other in physics because NO biologist has a second degree in physics...and you will ALWAYS have a job and always be in demand...but...you will never be one of "the crowd"... he really did use the word "crowd". Nobody thought of "elites" back then.
So...no... It is not that I do not "like" elites...i just dislike people who think they are "smarter than those people" and then try to "control "those" people" whatever their political persuasion. But it does seem that..."one side" of the political crowd really DOES want to control what other people do today... which... ironically is EXACTLY the opposite of what I...and we...as a beatnick and later hippie thought back in the fifties and the sixties...

There are those who say that if one waits long enough that the wind will change to the opposite tack...in boating and in politics...lol

thanks for the comment!
woodsmoke

[jglen490]

Here we are, again, with the assumption that Western civilization is the bane of all humanity. And it doesn't bother anyone that those who live, or have lived in Western civilization are the authors of such drivel? Start by not hating, including not hating yourself. When you do that, how you live your life will become different.

A life based only on past, unalterable data and analytics, is not a life at all.

[mr_raider]

Here we are, again, with the assumption that Western civilization is the bane of all humanity. And it doesn't bother anyone that those who live, or have lived in Western civilization are the authors of such drivel? Start by not hating, including not hating yourself. When you do that, how you live your life will become different.

A life based only on past, unalterable data and analytics, is not a life at all.

I'm sure Western civilization is the apotheosis of human achievement. The problem is you are not the first to believe so. The Roman noble in the 4th century probably believed their civilization was eternal and dominant, five minutes before the Huns, Vandals and Goths came crashing down on them. The Arab viziers at the Abbassid court in Baghdad probably believed they had achieved the perfect civilization, until Genghis Khan flattened them for good. The Japanese Daimyos of the Tokugawa shogunate probably believed they were the highest form of civilization on earth also, until the Meiji restoration rendered them obsolete relics walking around in bathrobes with pointy knives.

All civilizations rise and fall. This one is no exception.

[SpecialEd]

>>>

All civilizations rise and fall. This one is no exception.

"My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings
Look on my works ye mighty and despair
Nothing beside remains round the decay of that colossal wreck
Boundless and bare the lone and level sands stretch far away"

[jglen490]

The point is history has been, is, and will continue to be messy. Western Civ or not. I agree, no one's civilization lasts forever. Some do last for a very long time, others, not so long. Cutting off the study of history at some particular point is, well, pointless. The study of a slice of history is nearly as pointless; it's a story, but it's not history. Western (or European, or Russian, or Chinese, ad nauseum) history did not and does not exist in a vacuum, so it's study in a vacuum is bound to lead to incorrect understanding, whether of the good or of the bad.

Civilizations rise and fall, but those are simply stories. The cause of rise and the cause of fall is history. In the immediate aftermath, the winners write the first stories. It's not until much later that the objective stories can be written into history.

Like anyone who has ever lived in just about any civilization, I appreciate the good in which I have been able to live. As I get older, I also understand the bad, and the downright evil, that exists alongside. History is messy because humans are messy.

[jlittle]

I'm sure Western civilization is the apotheosis of human achievement. The problem is you are not the first to believe so...
All civilizations rise and fall. This one is no exception.

The whole rise and fall thing is a very western European perspective, that sees a birth in the Greeks, and a fall in the end of western Roman empire.

Another view is that our civilization started in what is now the fertile crescent, or nearby, and has persisted ever since, with light passing from culture to culture, often through several paths, to us. The Greeks didn't originate a lot of what they're given credit for, they were a channel through which much was passed to us, just as the Islamic golden age was. They're simply the ones we have the earliest written sources for. I see the same sort of thing in religions.

I'm not sure, but I suspect this is more like how Chinese look back on their civilization's history.