Subject:
|
Re: Evolution vs Scientific Creationism
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 12 Jul 2002 08:19:03 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
6079 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Joseph Williams writes:
>
> > sure where you got it from). It has to do with the fallacious logic
> > that the creation of this linear scale of human "development" engenders,
> > and the poor policies/decisions/analyses that come out of that logic.
> > Those do the *real* damage, in terms of livelihoods, families, and
> > sometimes lives themselves.
>
> There are actual groups of people for lack of a better term, we'll call a
> tribe, who having no technology beyond stone tool making and limited
> agriculture fall into a social development known as the Stone Age. These
> cultures have been having problems assimilating with more technologically
> advanced cultures for centuries. Did someone back in Spain say "let's not
> call the Mayans human sacrificing canabals but empoverished enlightened
> beings who's pyramids rival the Egyptians?' no, they melted their gold and
> burnt their libraries. If we can't call the Yanomama people modern Stone Age
> then what? Yes their culture is threatened, and? Is the term dismissive? It
> hadn't occured to me before that it might be and I have infinite respect for
> the stone age culture. So please don't accuse me of demeaning them, your the
> one who read into my labelling and mabye take a closer look at your own
> convictions. The Aztec and Mayans and unnamed cultures in Peru made their
> pyramids and cities with stone tools. They are discovering pyramids there
> that are 1 1/2 times the size of the pyramid of Giza. They predicted an
> eclipse on Dec. 16, 2012 ( noon? ) that according to them will be the end of
> the universe and the last eclipse in Mexico City they were off by a few
> minutes. This is a culture deemed as bloodthirsty savages and that was
> crime. It happens. Don't put your consceince on me because I'm calling a
> culture what it is.
Where did you read that this was an indictment of your intentions
regarding cultures? I was making a general point about the problems
with the terminology *that is used in the field*, and you're accusing
me of something totally out of left field. Were it not for your
being Canadian with an English surname, the logical disconnects
would have made me think it was a problem with the language.
Again: **I am NOT accusing you of racism, malicious intent, or the
dimunition of said cultures.** I simply have an analytical,
professional historian's objection to the use of a particular
term that takes certain ahistorical assumptions for granted,
and as an educator I am not inclined to let those things pass
unchallenged any more than Larry lets Guild of Bricksmiths™
trademark issues slide (I hope I got that right). That is all.
My goal was not to make you feel badly, and I'm sorry if I did.
LFB
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Evolution vs Scientific Creationism
|
| (...) There are actual groups of people for lack of a better term, we'll call a tribe, who having no technology beyond stone tool making and limited agriculture fall into a social development known as the Stone Age. These cultures have been having (...) (22 years ago, 12-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
395 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
