 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
History Forum / General / Ancient History / June 2004What is Civilization?
>Subject: Re: the question to be Black or White >From: Johan Gambelputty servio@gator.net >Date: 6/11/04 9:24 AM Pacific Daylight Time >Message-id: <ftmjc09ebjfa9pg9guiak2b5p5ptr1k88k@4ax.com> > >Peace. I'm willing to keep an open mind about it, but I don't believe >blacks invented civilization. I don't believe _any one race_ did. >It's how you define civilization, too. When did civilzation actually >start? You don't know that. Anyway, enjoy your new found heritage. Civilization is a state of being civilized. We may start by saying that civilization is a form of culture. So, it is first necessary to define culture. Speaking precisely, culture is patterned behavior. In other words, culture may be described as the patterned behavior which the individual learns, either through instruction or imitation, from other members of his social group. Culture consists of all forms of human behavior except those found among the apes. Among the forms of behavior common to man and ape are the following: Source: Introduction to African Civilizations by John G. Jackson Chapter 2: Ethiopia and the Origin of Civilization King MerenPTAH "There are many subjects that people can argue and come up with a different answer each time, but one cannot dispute the monuments found on the continent of Africa, from the Step Pyramid in Saqqara, the Great Pyramids, Sphinx, Abu Simbel, Tekhenw (Obelisks), the Great Temples of Wo-se (Waset), the Temple of Ipet-Isut (Karnak), and others... They weren't found in Europe, the Mediterranean, Asia, or elsewhere... AFRICA Herudotus" > >Subject: Re: the question to be Black or White > >From: Johan Gambelputty servio@gator.net [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > of his social group. Culture consists of all forms of human behavior except > those found among the apes. "Culture" is a word that applies specifically to humans, however, if you look at many groups of animals (kodiak bears, Koshima monkeys, and others) you'll find that behavior patterns (particularly in foraging) are noticably passed on from one generation to the next. In regard to human behavior, have you ever heard the phrase... the sins of the father are passed on to the son? > Among the forms of behavior common to man and ape are the following: > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Herudotus" >Subject: Re: What is Civilization? >From: "Jon Erlandson" jerlands@comcast.net [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] >you'll find that behavior patterns (particularly in foraging) are noticably >passed on from one generation to the next. Exactly what I stated above. In regard to human behavior, >have you ever heard the phrase... the sins of the father are passed on to >the son? No, Lucy...you gotz some 'splain'in to do. 'Esplain' it. >> Among the forms of behavior common to man and ape are the following: >> [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >> >> Herudotus" >>Subject: Re: the question to be Black or White >>From: Johan Gambelputty servio@gator.net [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >individual learns, either through instruction or imitation, from other members >of his social group. Culture can even mean gangs in L.A. or headhunters. But it doesn't mean they are civilized. <snip> >Subject: Re: What is Civilization? >From: Johan Gambelputty servio@gator.net [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >Culture can even mean gangs in L.A. or headhunters. But it doesn't >mean they are civilized. I said the same thing about the people before President Lincoln who condoned slavery and who today still practice racism. "Silence is also speech." King "doesn't mean they are civilized, either" MerenPTAH >>Subject: Re: What is Civilization? >>From: Johan Gambelputty servio@gator.net [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > >King "doesn't mean they are civilized, either" MerenPTAH There are obviously uncivilized members of all cultures. I think you would refer to people who condone(d) slavery as barbaric and that they lived in a civilization but were not civilized enough to know better. Racism is rampant from every race, not just whites, so I think it's unfair to say slavery and still practice racism in the same sentence, as if white people are the only bad ones. Later, J >Subject: Re: What is Civilization? >From: Johan Gambelputty servio@gator.net [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] >would refer to people who condone(d) slavery as barbaric and that they >lived in a civilization but were not civilized enough to know better. They most definitely were civilized enough to know that slavery is barbaric. They were just living in our society as "uncivilized" human beings. The worse part is that Christians kept silent. To make matters worse...Jim Crow laws, apartheid, discrimination, hatred and racism followed. How can man hate man, yet claim to love God? Those who claim there is no God, are the same ones pleading His name for their last dying breath. >Racism is rampant from every race, not just whites, so I think it's >unfair to say slavery and still practice racism in the same sentence, >as if white people are the only bad ones. Later, A lot of things in life are unfair, I could name plenty...but you do have a point. Slavery is one thing. To practice racism is quite another and unfortunately we all have been bitten by the disease, from one ethnicity or another. I retract my original statement, if that makes you feel better. Unfortunately you also got right that racism is rampant in every color/ethnicity of people. And, unfortunately people like to IMITATE those they 'hold dear and idolize...' if you get my drift. African Americans I know have learned how to be racist, from white racist people. King "I never said white people are the only bad ones" MerenPTAH >>Subject: Re: What is Civilization? >>From: Johan Gambelputty servio@gator.net [quoted text clipped - 64 lines] > >King "I never said white people are the only bad ones" MerenPTAH Thanks. You can bet that this white boy won't pass on racism for someone else to learn. Back to your original argument that whites are descended from blacks. I understand that a lot of people who are racists wouldn't want their ancesters to be black. That's not me. What I believe is some kind of proto-human left Africa and then the different races were descended from that accordingly. Not being the scholarly type, I could be wrong, so in a nutshell, I think it is interesting to have so many differing theories on what happened eons ago. It would make a great documentary on TV if it weren't such a sore issue. Take care. >Subject: Re: What is Civilization? >From: Johan Gambelputty servio@gator.net [quoted text clipped - 76 lines] >Thanks. You can bet that this white boy won't pass on racism for >someone else to learn. I respect that. >Back to your original argument that whites are descended from blacks. >I understand that a lot of people who are racists wouldn't want their >ancesters to be black. This is the crux of the racial issue of the Ancient Egyptians. People find it hard to admit they were black people, shades of Africans that range from light yellow to damn near white, to the blackest of black, what we refer to as blue-black. Your statement is on point: "a lot of people who are racists" can't begin to fathom the [thought] of their true ancestors of humanity to be black. This creates too many other questions. That's not me. What I believe is some kind of >proto-human This could mean so many things, can you be a little more specific? What type of proto-human are you talking about - what/how would they have looked? left Africa and then the different races were descended >from that accordingly. My question is: What makes you think they were proto-human instead of a true homo sapien sapien - in the form of man today who happened to be black? Not being the scholarly type, I could be wrong, >so in a nutshell, I think it is interesting to have so many differing >theories on what happened eons ago. It would make a great documentary >on TV if it weren't such a sore issue. > >Take care. It's a very sore issue to many...unfortunately. King MerenPTAH >>Subject: Re: the question to be Black or White >>From: Johan Gambelputty servio@gator.net [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >>It's how you define civilization, too. When did civilzation actually >>start? You don't know that. Anyway, enjoy your new found heritage. Civilization, As opposed to a culture, means that you have agriculture, cities, and writing. Civilization gets a good name because: (1) Civilizations tend to provide enough order and efficiency to support large populations, and (2) When you get to write things down and your opponents can't you get to control the historical verdict, e.g. The Celts may have had a great culture but they didn't write down what happened…the Romans did Civilization arose independently in several places around the globe where a suitable food crop and water supplies existed. When I was a boy it was taught that the Fertile Crescent was traditionally considered the cradle of civilization (i.e. it went first) but there have been some recent discoveries in China and in the Indus valley that may push the time frame back further in those regions. > Civilization is a state of being civilized. Tautology at best ;-) >Subject: Re: What is Civilization? >From: Steve andersen scawenonah@snip.net [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >control the historical verdict, e.g. The Celts may have had a great >culture but they didn't write down what happened…the Romans did Your example is what the ancient Africans we refer to as the ancient Egyptians created - a highly respected and rich civilization, none to ever match to this day. The same Africans who created civilization and culture, both of which I briefly described earlier in this thread. The ancient Africans (Egyptians) wrote things down in hieroglyps and painted illustrations in the stones (bas-reliefs). By memory, highly educated Egyptians were not permitted to write down many things, hence the stolen legacy of the Greeks. The Greeks, wrote down things they learned from the Africans, and stole [took credit] for what they learned. [The Greeks wrote things down like you mentioned and your response above became true.] This is all too familiar, even today. Overall, it was the ancient Africans in North, South, East and West Africa who created agriculture, cities, and writings and provided order and efficiency to support large populations. This was all accomplished while "Europe" was in the Dark Ages. King "Civilization is a state of being [civilized]" MerenPTAH P.S. How does this statement apply to certain people in our society today, is the question. <SNIP> > Your example is what the ancient Africans we refer to as the ancient > Egyptians created - a highly respected and rich civilization, none to > ever match to this day. While Egyptian civilization lasted millennia and produced many wonders before being absorbed into the larger eastern Mediterranean world It is hardly unmatched to this day. It was a typical "hydraulic empire" which dominated its place and time but was culturally and technologically surpassed by its more dynamic neighbors. People point to the pyramids as wonders. While organizing a society to transport and assemble all those blocks s well as feeding al the labor was indeed quite a feat BUT it really is a ham handed, brute-force construction method. If they had the arch or concrete they could have built lighter stronger structures at a far lower cost to their society. >The same Africans who created civilization and > culture, both of which I briefly described earlier in this thread. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > educated Egyptians were not permitted to write down many things, hence > the stolen legacy of the Greeks. The Greeks had quite a nice legacy of their own. ;-) They didn't write stuff down any more or less than the Egyptians but their writing system was easier to learn and both their writing system and their language had more in common with the peoples who followed. > The Greeks, wrote down things they > learned from the Africans, and stole [took credit] for what they > learned. [The Greeks wrote things down like you mentioned and your > response above became true.] This is all too familiar, even today. Greek and Egyptian civilizations had contacts all through the bronze and iron ages. It is no surprise that there would be exchanges of artifacts, technologies, and the like. But it is hardly a case of stealing. The way I understand it there is serious debate today about the spread of agriculture and weather is was by conquest, peaceful apportion of new technologies, or simply that the technologically superior cultures grew faster than its neighbors. > Overall, it was the ancient Africans in North, South, East and West > Africa who created agriculture, cities, and writings and provided > order and efficiency to support large populations. Acctually civilization arose separately in several locations. Most of which were not in Africa. While you may be able to argue that the vast arc form the Nile Delta to the Indus river may have effected each other. (Especially since wheat and barley are native to the Middle East.) but the yellow river and, more importantly, the Mesoamerican cultures clearly arose independently. As for the south east and west of Africa….AFAIK the cultures/civilizations there rose later. The native drops and climate in many areas just aren't compatible with centralized civil works that drove the formation of the first great empires. > This was all > accomplished while "Europe" was in the Dark Ages. "Dark ages" is usually used to describe a period of lost prosperity, technology, and/or political-social cohesion between historical periods. Such as the Egyptian "time of troubles" or the Chinese "contending kingdom periods In Europe there was one that effected the eastern Mediteranina at the end of the bronze age and another in western Europe at the end of Roman period. I don't think the period before the bronze age was necessarily a "dark age" they were just on their way up through the various Neolithic technologies and on their way to into the historical period. Similarly in Africa most of the continent was fairly late in advancing beyond the late Neolithic. That does not make them in a dark age dispite what the Victorians said about the place. > King "Civilization is a state of being [civilized]" MerenPTAH > > P.S. How does this statement apply to certain people in our society > today, is the question. Which statement is that? >Subject: Re: What is Civilization? >From: Steve andersen scawenonah@snip.net [quoted text clipped - 95 lines] > >Which statement is that? STATEMENT: You neglect to provide a source/citation for your opinions. This post is a perfect example. You have a serious problem not providing some type of source for the diatribe you spew. It would be nice if you didn't just comment so much with your opinions, after all, opinions are like a.sholes - everybody has one! But it would at least give some type of credibility to your statements. Some credibility. King "our conversation is done" MerenPTAH >>> King "Civilization is a state of being [civilized]" MerenPTAH >>> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > STATEMENT: You neglect to provide a source/citation for your opinions. > This post is a perfect example. What? I was asking what statement you were your referring to? And do opinions need source materials? They are, after all, opinions. > You have a serious problem not providing some type of source for the > diatribe you spew. It would be nice if you didn't just comment so much [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > King "our conversation is done" MerenPTAH Diatribe? Spew? Would you like a little ad hominem with your ad nauseum? ;-) I was hoping to exchange ideas rather than be lectured to. What an insufferable, dismissive person you seem to be I guess that's why we don't have kings anymore where I come from But if you want references I'll bring some next time. Not that I've seen you post any Especially for the astonishing claim that East, South, and West Africa are coequal centers of civilization with the Nile valley. You made the claim...you provide your citations I merely pointed out that the "cradles of civilization" are fairly well established. (I reference any intro to history book) All of these civilizations have features in common including a viable food crop and a water source that requires a good deal of engineering and central planning to administer and control...that is how you get a civilization. Your statement that "civilization is the state of being civilized" is not only tautology, its' grammatically incorrect AND falls into the trap of assigning a civilization morally superior position. >Subject: Re: What is Civilization? >From: Steve andersen scawenonah@snip.net [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > >They are, after all, opinions. And I wrote this regarding your opinions: >> You have a serious problem not providing some type of source for the >> diatribe you spew. -------------->[It would be nice if you didn't just comment so much >> with your opinions, after all, opinions are like a.sholes - everybody >> has one! But it would at least give some type of credibility to your >> statements. Some credibility.]<-------------- Do you have a comprehension problem too? If I say opinions are like a.sholes it certainly includes yours! Therefore, yes, your opinions need source materials for me to continue with you on this subject. >> King "our conversation is done" MerenPTAH <snip> >What an insufferable, dismissive person you seem to be I guess I learned well from our society. >I guess that's why we don't have kings anymore where I come from > >But if you want references I'll bring some next time. You should have brought them with you this time instead of showing up empty-handed. Figures. >Not that I've seen you post any >Especially for the astonishing claim that East, South, and West Africa >are coequal centers of civilization with the Nile valley. You made the >claim...you provide your citations Again, your comprehension skills are lacking. You have none. I didn't say anywhere they were coequal centers of civilization. I said they also created agriculture, cities and writings - elements of civilization. I noticed your a.s...I mean, opinion regarding "food crop and water sources" and how one "gets a civilization." Lacking of course, references or source materials. >I merely pointed out that the "cradles of civilization" are fairly well >established. (I reference any intro to history book) [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >only tautology, its' grammatically incorrect AND falls into the trap of >assigning a civilization morally superior position. I'd say pretty much all of which you wrote here is incorrect and falls into the category of "retardation." But that's my opinion... King MerenPTAH "There is a quality about the state of slavery that causes men to lose their knowledge of exactly what is good and what is bad. To be sure, not all are touched in the exact same way. But it is a tragic truth that many, if not most, unless they fight against it, become like dogs who are whipped too often. Dogs that lick their master's hand, the same hand that held the whip, when that hand gives the beast a piece of meat." D. Panger >>And do opinions need source materials? >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Do you have a comprehension problem too? No, I've always been considered fairly bright. ;-) And in the "real world" I'm paid to give my opinions. But yes opinions are like anuses; most are serviceable and do their job well and anonymously; there are a few which are sore, inflamed, hemorrhoidal and generally irritating. And while we can't live without them, some of them stink. ;-) >If I say opinions are like > a.sholes it certainly includes yours! Therefore, yes, your opinions > need source materials for me to continue with you on this subject. > How can a personal opinion have source materials other than the person whose opinion it is? Wouldn't that be like borrowing someone else's a.shole? ;-) In any event, I was under the impression that this wasn't some scholarly journal where references would, without question, be needed but rather the equivalent of a barroom conversation in electrons. If you wanted to assert that Mickey Mantel could beat Pele in hockey or that Rameses III could kick Ptolemy III's a.s that would be well within the bounds of an unmoderated, alt newsgroup. Look, let's try this the right way. Hello, your Majesty, my name is Steve. By day I am a hard core technical geek so at night I sometimes seek diversion as an armchair historian and dilettante to relax. I understand that you have some Opinions on the origins of Egyptian civilization? The reason that I ask is that I've heard of the Afrocentirc debates in scholarly circles but only the most over the top stuff ever gets discussed in the wider world so the details of any serious work is kind of lost in the noise. > STATEMENT: You neglect to provide a source/citation for your opinions. > This post is a perfect example. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > King "our conversation is done" MerenPTAH Wait a minute! Come to think about it I did give you that reference for the Jablonski and Chaplin paper on the evolution of skin color to refute your claim that monkeys had dark skin You just choose to ignore it. > STATEMENT: You neglect to provide a source/citation for your opinions. > This post is a perfect example. And another thing You go off spouting about Egypt being the greatest civilization, envied by all, never to be equaled with out giving a reference You claim that large portions of sub-Saharan Africa are the cradles of civilization without giving a reference. You claim that everyone else "stole" the Africans legacy without giving a reference (which is a slap in the face to indigenous cultures the world over) You claim that pre-hominids were dark skinned without a reference You claim that the Greeks and other Europeans "stole" (whatever that means in the case of developing cultures) from the Egyptians (or rather as you would put it the Africans) without a reference You ignore the rather innocent questions and observations of others You contradict history as understood by mainstream scientists without a reference You refer to some "ancient" sources without a reference You claim that contempory "black" men are somehow the "first" humans, even though they are the product of evolution just like every other contemporary population on the planet without a reference You claim that "you can't create a black man" which is obviously silly since we have black men today so somewhere along the line they were "created" You ignore questions to your ascertations and do nothing but produce ad homenum attacks. Get over it man! Your ancestors developed certain technologies later than others...well so did mine. No shame in that. It doesn't make you a bad person. The few centuries that separate some technological achievements are nothing in the grand scheme of things. Why are you so desperate to bolster the claims about your ancestors that you must denigrate the achievements of others? Give your ancestors the credit they deserve. As I said before there is more than enough real, substantiated, cultural developments in Africa without you having to make @#@$ up or steal from other cultures. Steve (not a King but glad "our conversation is done" ) Andersen >Subject: Re: What is Civilization? >From: Steve andersen scawenonah@snip.net [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >> >And another thing <cut> >Give your ancestors the credit they deserve. That's why I'm on these newsgroups. You're a slow learner... >Steve (not a King but glad "our conversation is done" ) Andersen Time will tell how glad you are. If I'm lucky, I'll never hear from you again. King "if I'm lucky" MerenPTAH No, if'n Im lucky me Marster will let me be BUTT ee FULL!!! > >Subject: Re: What is Civilization? > >From: Steve andersen scawenonah@snip.net [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > King "if I'm lucky" MerenPTAH |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.